Originally posted by Bigfella
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Syrian Civil War Developments
Collapse
X
-
Meanwhile, the Russians have a large number of heavy lift vessels heading hell for leather to Tartus. I very much doubt they're there to drop off marines and supplies.
Depending on who you ask, Russia's naval base in Tartus, Syria, is either a strategically meaningless throwback to the Soviet glory days -- or an essential part of its national security.
On Tuesday, Russia's Interfax news service reported, citing anonymous sources within the country's Defense Ministry, that Russian warships had left ports across Europe to head to the Eastern Mediterranean, some destined for Syria. Eleven ships, including five large amphibious transports -- four capable of carrying 200 soldiers and ten tanks each, and one capable of carrying twice as many -- would sail from various locations in the Arctic, Black and Baltic Seas to participate in exercises in the Atlantic and Mediterranean.
Interfax says that some of those ships are expected to eventually dock at the port of Tartus in Syria to offload food, water and fuel and take on new supplies.
Interfax claims "a military diplomatic source" said that landing ships and destroyers would make a port call in Tartus. The Russian news agency mentions that one destroyer, the Smetlivy, from the Black Sea, would reach Tartus within just three days. Two large transports, Nikolai Filchenkov and Tsezar Kunikov (the latter of which participated in the war with Georgia in 2008), are also expected from the Black Sea, though it is yet unknown whether they too would dock in Syria.
RIA Novosti says that the Admiral Chabanenko, an advanced destroyer, and three landing craft -- the Alexander Otrakovsky, Georgy Pobedonosets and Kondopoga -- would leave from the Arctic Fleet base in Murmansk. Interfax states that all four ships are expected to dock in Tartus, though it is unknown whether they are carrying a large contingent of marines, or whether those marines would even remain in Syria.Last edited by Parihaka; 19 Jul 12,, 00:17.In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.
Leibniz
Comment
-
My guess is they will provide Anti-Air support when the Alawite state goes independent. The personnel is probably to establish control on the ground for the AA units defense/control.
Originally posted by Parihaka View PostThink of it this way, he's conveniently collecting all the bad eggs in one basket. One well placed missile can now effectively end the whole fiasco.
Someone will take charge even if the regime falls over.Originally from Sochi, Russia.
Comment
-
Is the end near or are Western observers underestimating Assad's staying power?
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/19/wo...nted=2&_r=1&hp
Washington Begins to Plan for Collapse of Syrian Government
By HELENE COOPER
Published: July 18, 2012
WASHINGTON — With the growing conviction that the Assad family’s 42-year grip on power in Syria is coming to an end, Obama administration officials worked on contingency plans Wednesday for a collapse of the Syrian government, focusing particularly on the chemical weapons that Syria is thought to possess and that President Bashir al-Assad could try to use on opposition forces and civilians.
Pentagon officials were in talks with Israeli defense officials about whether Israel might move to destroy Syrian weapons facilities, two administration official said. The administration is not advocating such an attack, the American officials said, because of the risk that it would give Mr. Assad an opportunity to rally support against Israeli interference.
President Obama’s national security adviser, Thomas Donilon, was in Israel over the weekend and discussed the Syrian crisis with officials there, a White House official said.
Mr. Obama called President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia on Wednesday and urged him again to allow Mr. Assad to be pushed from power. Russia, so far, has refused. A White House statement said that Mr. Putin and Mr. Obama “noted the growing violence in Syria and agreed on the need to support a political transition as soon as possible that achieves our shared goal of ending the violence and avoiding a further deterioration of the situation.”
The statement pointedly noted the “differences our governments have had on Syria,” but said the two leaders “agreed to have their teams continue to work toward a solution.”
American diplomatic and military officials said the bombing in Damascus on Wednesday that killed several of Mr. Assad’s closest advisers was a turning point in the conflict. “Assad is a spent force in terms of history,” Jay Carney, the White House press secretary, told reporters. “He will not be a part of Syria’s future.”
Alluding to Russia’s position, Mr. Carney said the argument that Mr. Assad’s ouster would result in more violence was refuted by the bombing, and that Mr. Assad’s continued rule “will result in greater violence,” not less.
Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta said on Wednesday that Syria’s crisis, was “rapidly spinning out of control.”
Within hours of the bombing, the Treasury Department announced additional sanctions against the Syrian prime minister and some 28 other cabinet ministers and senior officials, part of the administration’s effort to make life so difficult for the government that Mr. Assad’s allies desert him. “As long as Assad stays in power, the bloodshed and instability in Syria will only mount,” said David S. Cohen, a senior Treasury official.
Behind the scenes, the administration’s planning has already shifted to what to do after an expected fall of the Assad government, and what such a collapse could look like. A huge worry, administration officials said, is that in desperation Mr. Assad would use chemical weapons to try to quell the uprising.
“The Syrian government has a responsibility to safeguard its stockpiles of chemical weapons, and the international community will hold accountable any Syrian officials who fails to meet that obligation,” Mr. Carney said.
Any benefit of an Israeli raid on Syria’s weapons facilities would have to be weighed against the possibility that the Assad government would exploit such a raid for its own ends, said Martin S. Indyk, the former United States ambassador to Israel and director of the Foreign Policy Program at the Brookings Institution.
He and several administration officials said the view was that Mr. Assad might use chemical weapons as a last resort. “But it crosses a red line, and changes the whole nature of the discussion,” Mr. Indyk said. “There would be strong, if not overwhelming sentiment, internationally, to stop him.” Russia, in particular, would probably have to drop its opposition to tougher United Nations sanctions against Syria, and Mr. Assad’s other remaining ally, Iran, would probably not look too kindly on a chemical attack.
The Obama administration must also worry about Mr. Assad’s arsenal, including chemical weapons, falling into other hands, including those of Al Qaeda — a risk at the center of the administration’s concerns, according to Robert Malley of the
“The government is falling,” Mr. Malley said. “But what will the fall look like? It could fall in Damascus, but not elsewhere; it could crumble in other areas but not the Alawite ones — there are a lot of variations to this.”
Beyond trying to stop the Assad government from using weapons of mass destruction, the United States must also work to make sure that the Alawite minority, ascendant under Mr. Assad and largely loyal to him, is not massacred once its protector is gone.
Mr. Obama has come under criticism from some Republicans in Congress who say that the United States should intervene militarily in Syria, and from Mitt Romney, his Republican opponent, who has said that he would arm the Syrian opposition, which the administration has not done directly.
Instead, Mr. Obama has backed United Nations efforts and urged Russia to join the United States in calling for Mr. Assad to step down. While the president has been faulted for his policy toward Syria, some foreign policy experts said that Mr. Obama’s approach could be vindicated, particularly if Mr. Assad is toppled without the United States taking military action.
The administration has not officially armed the Syrian rebels, but it has provided some financial aid, and has helped to prop up the Syrian opposition by its many efforts to delegitimize Mr. Assad through a steady stream of calls for him to step down.
The United States, Mr. Malley said “may actually achieve what it wanted — a fall of the regime without having to intervene militarily.”
But, he added, “Then it has to deal with all the variants of what a fall looks like, and what a post-Assad Syria looks like.”To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato
Comment
-
Originally posted by cyppok View PostMy guess is they will provide Anti-Air support when the Alawite state goes independent. The personnel is probably to establish control on the ground for the AA units defense/control.
What most people ignore is a very simple aspect of Syrian military. If the entire officer core and NCO is mostly homogenous it won't matter if you kill the top. The Alawite core will realize they have to go their own way and they will only need to have cohesion in one area. How dumb do you think they are to put down their weapons and leave their fate to the wind of Islmists or Seculars from a different religious sect? It really is survival 101 in my mind.
Someone will take charge even if the regime falls over.In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.
Leibniz
Comment
-
Originally posted by cyppok View PostWhat most people ignore is a very simple aspect of Syrian military. If the entire officer core and NCO is mostly homogenous it won't matter if you kill the top. The Alawite core will realize they have to go their own way and they will only need to have cohesion in one area. How dumb do you think they are to put down their weapons and leave their fate to the wind of Islmists or Seculars from a different religious sect? It really is survival 101 in my mind.
Comment
-
The possibility of a break up of Syria is not so much a what-if as a definite goal of Assad, according to Abdullah Bozkurt of Today Kaman,, a Turkish media outlet.
Clearly Assad has been carving out a large piece of Syria to eventually settle for less in the coastal area from the Turkish border up in the north all the way down to Lebanon in the south. The main battleground for Assad at this juncture is to control Sunni-dominated Homs, which is located at the critical juncture along the northeastern corridor between the two largest cities, Damascus and Aleppo. It will be a key for the future viability of an Alawite state to not let Homs be controlled by their arch-enemy, the Sunnis. That is why we have been seeing most of the fighting taking place in this northwestern city between Assad loyalists and the opposition.
As far as I know, the only time Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu spoke of the possibility of an Alawite state in Syria was on the return flight from Tunisia on Feb. 28 after attending the Friends of Syria Group meeting. He said if there were such a plan to divide Syria, Turkey would try to prevent it from happening. “If some people have such a thing [an Alawite state] in their mind, all of our efforts will be devoted to not letting that happen,” he told reporters onboard the plane.
Establishing an Alawite state along the coastline will open Pandora’s box for everyone in the Middle East. The Sunni-dominated Syria will be cut off from access to the Mediterranean. But this will also shatter Iranian landline access to the sea and Hezbollah in Lebanon, tearing apart the Shiite crescent. Lebanon may very well break into pieces, with some Alawites wanting to merge with the newly established Alawite state while Sunnis may unite with their Arab brethren in the new Syria. From an Israeli perspective, there is good news and bad news. For one, they will have to watch over their shoulders for a Sunni-controlled Syria including the Golan Heights, yet it will find a perfect ally, the Alawites in the west, united in the common goal of combating the Sunnis.To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato
Comment
-
ANTAKYA, Turkey — The lethal attack on Wednesday on President Bashar al-Assad’s senior security chiefs aligned neatly with a tactical shift that had changed the direction of Syria’s long conflict: the opposition fighters’ swift and successful adoption of makeshift bombs.
Multimedia
Bombs have been in rebel use since violence intensified in Syria in late 2011. But since midspring, anti-Assad fighters have become bolder and sharply more effective with their use, and not only in what is apparently their hand in the assassinations in Damascus.
Improvised bombs have steadily become the most punishing weapon in the otherwise underequipped rebels’ arsenal, repeatedly destroying Syria’s main battle tanks, halting army convoys and inflicting heavy casualties on government ground operations in areas where armed resistance is strong, Western analysts and rebel field commanders and fighters said.......
“The bomb is not only essential, it is a main part of our success,” said a former Syrian Army artillery major, who called himself Abu Akhmed and leads a fighting group in Idlib, a northern Syrian province, in a meeting in a house in this Turkish city crowded with fighters.
“When you think of why we are improving and getting stronger, it is not because more weapons are coming in from outside,” he added. “The main reason is because we are becoming more organized, and because of our bombs.”........
Joseph Holliday, a former American Army intelligence officer who is now an analyst covering Syria for the Institute of the Study of War, in Washington, said the changes were not in the rate of attacks, but in a rapidly evolving prowess.
“The percentage of I.E.D. attacks compared to overall rebel activity has not increased in a statistically significant way,” Mr. Holliday wrote by e-mail, just hours before the assassinations in Damascus. “What has increased is the percentage of effective attacks.”
But, he added, “what has increased the most, and this has been the hardest thing to put a finger on through open source research, is the number of what U.S. military might call ‘catastrophic’ I.E.D. attacks.”
By that he meant bombs that destroyed heavily armored tanks, or caused large numbers of casualties........
Mr. Holliday said the capability “comes in part from the expertise of Syrian insurgents who learned bomb-making while fighting U.S. troops in eastern Iraq.”
An American official who follows the fighting in Syria and spoke on the condition of anonymity noted another example of turnabout. Some of the expertise, the official said, appeared to have been derived from the very trainers in explosives, who were formerly in Syrian intelligence or under its tutelage, with which Syria for decades exported bomb-making and other lethal skills to groups it sponsored in neighboring states.........
Anti-Assad commanders credited the bombs with helping to change the fighters’ psychological experience of the battle against their government. Many rebel fighters, who said they were once afraid of government forces, now said they saw government ground operations as opportunities to kill Syrian troops along the roads, weaken the government and frustrate the army — a shift that emboldened them and engendered confidence.
Now, they said, it is the Syrian Army troops who are afraid, at least when they leave their garrisons and bases, and it is the rebels who sometimes feel like hunters.
“You don’t see trucks any more, soldiers riding in trucks” in the northern countryside, another fighter said. “The last time we saw trucks, everybody was excited.”In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.
Leibniz
Comment
-
If the bomb that killed Assad's senior leaders was an inside job, as has been reported, that is one sign that the regime is collapsing.
Rebel sources say the bomb was planted the day before the meeting.
But what is odd is the lack of visible damage to the National Security HQ building where the bomb attack took place.
The attack was the culmination of days of clashes between rebel fighters and the armed forces in a number of areas of Damascus.
But, in contrast with earlier explosions in Damascus, there were no photos or video from the scene of Wednesday's blast and the BBC's Lina Sinjab said no windows in the building appeared to be broken.
I had earlier walked around the area where the attack took place. Some of the residents told me they hadn't heard gunfire or explosions.
Maybe it happened in a secure bunker within the building which would raise questions as to how close to Assad's inner circle was the bomber...To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato
Comment
-
Jad most of the break up thoughts I had myself in the "what if Syria fractures thread"
The problem is armed intervention. Picture this the state is declared, recognized by Iran, Russia, Venezuela, Iraq etc...
If Turkey invades they come into play. Ergo it earns open season on itself. Full shadow support for Kurds from Iran etc... emerges to destabilize the region within Turkey. Right now the control over the Kurdish area[in Syria] is De-facto theirs and they are De-facto an autonomy, armed and contiguous with Iraqi Kurdistan. There will be resistance even if they loose area control.
What does Russia do post evacuation if there was an intervention? Lets assume those ships are carrying AA and it goes against them and they have to evacuate their personnel. What do they do after once they lost all influence in the region?
What would Iran do? fellow Shiites being suppressed by Turkish intervention... It sort of gives them a Cassus Belli.
The pipelines matter as well everyone needs cash flow.
Mid east is fully of former officers whom became rulers of their countries once regimes toppled. Whatever semblance the armed forces are in as long as there is some cohesion they have a role to play.
My feeling is this once Syria goes unglued no amount of glue will put humpty dumpty together again. What people ignore is the cross border aspects it creates. Think about this Kurds if they go independent will try to link up with Iraqi Kurdistan that is really a given.
But what is also ignored those Sunni Arabs in Syria and in Iraq can also pool into a state.
The sunni fighters from Iraq have been essentially flowing back and forth. Once the state in Syria topples over {Independence or Intervention it wont matter much} the fighters on the ground will have their own ideology of what should occur. Yes it may become discarded and dominated by foreign countries but the problem is a true civil war over ideological and future development of their region will form up that could sweep from Syria and into Sunni Iraq. We get a very very big area of operations with everyone fighting. Alawites on the coast, Kurds on top and Sunnis in the middle. Through 2-3 countries if we consider Kurds will most likely try to defend themselves in Turkey as well as through Syria and Iraq. Almost forgot to mention since the Sunnis are essentially out of power in Iraq and Syria by virtue of being shut out the only way for them to express political aims is militarily at this point. Thus Syria if/and/or/when the regime falls will have a good chance of sparking all this due to having essentially a HUGE vacuum of power that will be attempted to be filled from every possible angle outside/inside etc...Last edited by cyppok; 19 Jul 12,, 05:31.Originally from Sochi, Russia.
Comment
-
Cypock:
Let's try to keep the what-if on the other thread. The only reason I mentioned the possibility of an Alewite state is because one astute observer thinks Assad has been making moves in that direction for some time. I think there's little chance an Alewite state will come about, especially with Assad as it's head.To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato
Comment
-
Since the fighting has started in the capital city, Damascus, then Assads regime has little time left.
He is only fighting a delaying battle as, one by one his senior commanders defect over to the rebels.
Cheers!...on the rocks!!
Comment
-
Jad the power vacuum if the regime falls spans at least 4 communities. Kurds(in Turkey/Syria/Iraq), Sunnii Arabs(Syria,Iraq), Alawites, Christians, etc...
Even if Assad is gone it does not change the orientation of the officer core or others whom were his subordinates. Regime change under the current dogma implies complete and total sweep of current people in power. All those people have vested interests.
In Egypt the military remained in power while Mubarak fell, here it is clear this is following Iraq 2 scenario. All in power now would be thrown out.
Do you think Sunnis would fight harder for Saddam if they knew their position in the future? locked out of gov't more or less with Shia and Kurds dominant. People in the region realize this very well thus the Sunnis in Syria are more zealous in their uprising and the Alawites more zealous in their suppression.Originally from Sochi, Russia.
Comment
-
Cypock:
It seems to me fanciful that Syria would split apart into sectarian states. The country is economically integrated with the state owning the major industries and it has a fairly efficient bureaucracy. I don't see any gain for the people in breaking up into sovereign entities duplicating the wheels of government. The Syrian uprising is not fueled so much by sectarian rivalry as it is opposition to the suffocating political domination of the Baath party. The party, as you know, was originally created by a Sunni, a Christian and an Alawite, and was pan-arab, transcending national borders. So who do you blame? Of course, the party was co-opted years ago in Syria by Assad's father and Saddam in Iraq. I'll have no more to say in this thread on this what-if. Please take it back to the what-if thread.To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato
Comment
-
Originally posted by JAD_333 View PostCypock:
It seems to me fanciful that Syria would split apart into sectarian states. The country is economically integrated with the state owning the major industries and it has a fairly efficient bureaucracy. I don't see any gain for the people in breaking up into sovereign entities duplicating the wheels of government. The Syrian uprising is not fueled so much by sectarian rivalry as it is opposition to the suffocating political domination of the Baath party. The party, as you know, was originally created by a Sunni, a Christian and an Alawite, and was pan-arab, transcending national borders. So who do you blame? Of course, the party was co-opted years ago in Syria by Assad's father and Saddam in Iraq. I'll have no more to say in this thread on this what-if. Please take it back to the what-if thread.
I don't know quiet a few stories have that there will be "vengence" on the Alawites once the gov't is thrown off I tend to think it will happen. The problem is all those bureaucrats in nice places and officers in power have their lives on the line not just a paycheck. They have families and extended families which when SHTF may need to have a separate state to live in the region, sure you might get a little poorer but you're breathing... thats always a plus.
This is kind of a no longer what if I am mentioning here this is the sentiment on the ground.
The feeling of potential future reprisal is very much why Shabithas are springing up.Originally from Sochi, Russia.
Comment
Comment