04-14-2018, 10:18 PM
(This post was last modified: 04-14-2018, 10:52 PM by John J. Xenakis.)
*** 15-Apr-18 World View -- Iran, Hezbollah and Syria threaten retaliation against Israel
This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
****
**** American, British, French attack on Syria signals sharp change in Western policy
****
![[Image: g180414b.jpg]](http://Media.GenerationalDynamics.com/ww2010/g180414b.jpg)
Audience for Saturday's speech by Hezbollah leader Nasrallah (Reuters)
As we reported on Friday evening,
the joint attack on Syrian targets by American, British and French
forces ended as quickly as it started. The attack was in retaliation
for the attack on April 7 by Syria's president Bashar al-Assad on
civilians in Douma, using chemical weapons.
The attack occurred at 4 am Syrian time, and was over in minutes. 105
missiles were launched, striking three Syrian chemical weapons
targets. The military said that all missiles reached their target,
and denied Syrian claims that most (or any) were shot down.
The attack was "one and done," according to Secretary of
Defense James Mattis. However, Mattis and other US officials
have stated clearly that another attack will follow if al-Assad
uses chemical weapons again.
So America's message to Bashar al-Assad is pretty clear: "You may use
barrel bombs, missiles, gunfire, and any other conventional weapons on
neighborhoods, markets, schools and hospitals, and you may massacre
and kill as many women and children as you want, with no retribution.
Just don't use chemical weapons."
The targets and time of day of Saturday morning's attack were
carefully chosen so as to avoid civilian casualties, particularly
Russian casualties. The Russian military did not respond, and it was
clear that both the US and Russian side did everything possible to
avoid confronting each other.
However, the language used by Russia on Saturday was extremely
bitter and angry. And according to Pentagon spokesman
Dana White,
<QUOTE>"The Russian disinformation campaign has already
begun. There has been a 2000 per cent increase in Russian trolls
in the last 24 hours."<END QUOTE>
As someone who is attacked constantly by Russian trolls, this
is disheartening news.
At Saturday's UN Security Council meeting by Russia's ambassador
Vasily Nebenzya expressed deep anger:
<QUOTE>"The US and its allies continue to demonstrate
blatant disregard for international law. You are constantly
tempted by neocolonialism. You have nothing but disdain for the
UN charter, and the Security Council. As a pretext for
aggression, you mention the alleged use of chemical weapons in
Douma, but after an investigation by Russian experts, it was
proven unequivocally that no such attacks took
place."<END QUOTE>
The invocation of international law by Russia is really laughable,
as Russia has done everything from invading and annexing Crimea
to support the worst genocidal monster so far this century,
Bashar al-Assad, without getting approval for anything from the
UN Security Council, yet Russian officials become apoplectic
when the US or the West does anything to avoid their UNSC veto.
As I've been writing starting in 2011, Russia's president Vladimir
Putin adopted a policy of using the UN Security Council to take
control of US, Nato and Western foreign policy. Russia took any
military action it pleased without getting UNSC approval, but demanded
that any other country got UNSC approval for everything. By using its
UNSC veto, Russia could effectively control American foreign policy.
This Russian policy has been extremely successful for years, crippling
not only Western foreign policy, but the UN Security Council itself.
I believe that success reached its peak with the March 4 poisoning of former Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia,
using a Russia-developed nerve
agent Novichok. The British public was incensed that Russia put
ordinary British citizens at risk by using Novichok in public, where
anyone could be affected, but Russia made matters worse when Russia's
president Vladimir Putin smirked and gave a sarcastic answer when a
BBC reporter asked about it.
This was following by a series of moronic claims by Russia, including
accusing Britain of poisoning the Skripals in order to embarrass
Russia. Britain's foreign secretary Boris Johnson gave a furious
response to these claims: "There is something in the kind of smug,
sarcastic response that we’ve heard that indicates their fundamental
guilt. They want to simultaneously deny it, yet at the same time to
glory in it."
The Skripal poisoning was an international tipping point, uniting
Britain and other nations to no longer tolerate Russia's
strategy to use the UNSC to cripple Western foreign policy.
That's why Russian ambassador Vasily Nebenzya and other Russian
officials are so bitterly angry. The policy they had successfully
used for years is now collapsing in front of them.
Further remarks by the Russians have the appearance of hysterical
desperation. There have been horrifying videos of al-Assad's April 7
chemical attack on Douma, but Nebenzya and other Russian officials are
claiming that the chemical attack didn't even occur. They claim that
the British government paid the "White Helmet" humanitarian workers in
Douma to stage the horrifying videos as a Hollywood production. One
gets the impression that the Russians as a nation are becoming
completely delusional.
Meanwhile, Syrians in Damascus were dancing in the streets on
Saturday, because the military strikes were not as bad as feared.
Guardian (Australia) and The Hill
Related Articles:
****
**** Britain publishes its legal justification for military action
****
I've always believed that there was plenty of legal justification for
American and Western military intervention in Syria. After al-Assad
began targeting peaceful protesters in 2011, and particularly after he
massacred thousands of innocent women and children in a Palestinian
refugee camp in Latakia in August 2011, millions of Syrian citizens
began fleeing into neighboring countries, including over a million
reaching Europe. Any country has a responsibility to control its own
population, but al-Assad had essentially weaponized refugees. If
al-Assad can't control its own population, but instead uses
them as a weapon, then any target is justified in intervening in
the country.
In addition, al-Assad's attack on the Palestinian camp caused tens of
thousands of Sunni jihadists to travel from around the world to fight
al-Assad. These foreign jihadists formed the so-called Islamic State
(IS or ISIS or ISIL or Daesh), which has launched terror attacks on
other countries. Once again, if al-Assad can't control ISIS, then any
country threatened by ISIS is justified in intervening. In fact, the
US military intervention in Syria has succeeded in recapturing all
territory formerly occupied by ISIS, although ISIS is far from
completely defeated.
So the West certainly has plenty of justifications for military
intervention in Syria, but al-Assad's use of chemical weapons doubles
down on those justifications.
But in the end, the justification for this kind of military action has
less to do with international law, and more to do with domestic
politics. For that reason, the British government has published a
humanitarian justification policy paper for Saturday's military
action. Here's a brief summary:
The Syrian regime's use of chemical weapons is a war crime and a crime
against humanity.
Under international law, the UK may use force for humanitarian
intervention, provided that three conditions are met:
The policy paper goes on to explain why all three conditions have been
met. BBC and
UK Government
****
**** Iran, Hezbollah and Syria threaten retaliation against Israel
****
Although the debate over Saturday's airstrikes has
dominated news coverage since the April 7 chemical attack,
there's a completely different parallel issue in play, which
may be even more dangerous.
On Monday last week, Israel attacked Syria's T4 airbase (Tayfur airport),
because the airbase is
considered a threat to Israel. Apparently seven Iranians were killed
in the attack.
Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah says that the attack put
Israel into direct combat with Iran:
<QUOTE>"You made a historic mistake and a great folly which
brings you into direct confrontation with Iran.
This is the first time in 7 years that the Israelis have
deliberately killed Iranian revolutionary guards. Attacking T-4
airport is a pivotal incident in the history of the region that
can’t be ignored.
Iran is not a weak or a cowardly state, and you know that well.
The Israeli have false calculation. You will have to face the
Islamic Republic of Iran.
All those thousands of terrorists in Syria do not concern the
Israeli while they have every kind of weapons, however, they are
afraid of just few revolutionary guards there."<END QUOTE>
According to the BBC, Syria, Iran and Russia are all expressing quiet
relief that Saturday's missile attack was considerably more limited
than was expected. But it did evoke a sense of greater defiance, with
the three entities calling themselves the "Axis of Resistance," and
referring to Western powers as "paper tigers," a phrase used by
China's Mao Zedong in the 1960s to describe the United States.
It's generally believed that Iran must retaliate for Israel's
airstrike, killing several Iranian revolutionary guards. This
could be a far more dangerous confrontation than even
Saturday's missile strikes.
Long time readers are aware that Generational Dynamics predicts that
the Mideast is headed for a major regional war, pitting Jews against
Arabs, Sunnis against Shias, and various ethnic groups against each
other. Events appear to be moving very quickly now. Al Manar (Hezbollah) and
Reuters and Al-Jazeera
Related Articles:
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Syria, Bashar al-Assad, Russia, Iran,
France, Britain, Syria, Damascus, Homs, Vasily Nebenzya,
James Mattis, Nikki Haley, Dana White, Vladimir Putin,
Boris Johnson, Sergei Skripal, Yulia Skripal, Novichok,
Islamic State / of Iraq and Syria/Sham/the Levant, IS, ISIS, ISIL, Daesh,
Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah
Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal
John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe
This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
- American, British, French attack on Syria signals sharp change in Western policy
- Britain publishes its legal justification for military action
- Iran, Hezbollah and Syria threaten retaliation against Israel
****
**** American, British, French attack on Syria signals sharp change in Western policy
****
Audience for Saturday's speech by Hezbollah leader Nasrallah (Reuters)
As we reported on Friday evening,
the joint attack on Syrian targets by American, British and French
forces ended as quickly as it started. The attack was in retaliation
for the attack on April 7 by Syria's president Bashar al-Assad on
civilians in Douma, using chemical weapons.
The attack occurred at 4 am Syrian time, and was over in minutes. 105
missiles were launched, striking three Syrian chemical weapons
targets. The military said that all missiles reached their target,
and denied Syrian claims that most (or any) were shot down.
The attack was "one and done," according to Secretary of
Defense James Mattis. However, Mattis and other US officials
have stated clearly that another attack will follow if al-Assad
uses chemical weapons again.
So America's message to Bashar al-Assad is pretty clear: "You may use
barrel bombs, missiles, gunfire, and any other conventional weapons on
neighborhoods, markets, schools and hospitals, and you may massacre
and kill as many women and children as you want, with no retribution.
Just don't use chemical weapons."
The targets and time of day of Saturday morning's attack were
carefully chosen so as to avoid civilian casualties, particularly
Russian casualties. The Russian military did not respond, and it was
clear that both the US and Russian side did everything possible to
avoid confronting each other.
However, the language used by Russia on Saturday was extremely
bitter and angry. And according to Pentagon spokesman
Dana White,
<QUOTE>"The Russian disinformation campaign has already
begun. There has been a 2000 per cent increase in Russian trolls
in the last 24 hours."<END QUOTE>
As someone who is attacked constantly by Russian trolls, this
is disheartening news.
At Saturday's UN Security Council meeting by Russia's ambassador
Vasily Nebenzya expressed deep anger:
<QUOTE>"The US and its allies continue to demonstrate
blatant disregard for international law. You are constantly
tempted by neocolonialism. You have nothing but disdain for the
UN charter, and the Security Council. As a pretext for
aggression, you mention the alleged use of chemical weapons in
Douma, but after an investigation by Russian experts, it was
proven unequivocally that no such attacks took
place."<END QUOTE>
The invocation of international law by Russia is really laughable,
as Russia has done everything from invading and annexing Crimea
to support the worst genocidal monster so far this century,
Bashar al-Assad, without getting approval for anything from the
UN Security Council, yet Russian officials become apoplectic
when the US or the West does anything to avoid their UNSC veto.
As I've been writing starting in 2011, Russia's president Vladimir
Putin adopted a policy of using the UN Security Council to take
control of US, Nato and Western foreign policy. Russia took any
military action it pleased without getting UNSC approval, but demanded
that any other country got UNSC approval for everything. By using its
UNSC veto, Russia could effectively control American foreign policy.
This Russian policy has been extremely successful for years, crippling
not only Western foreign policy, but the UN Security Council itself.
I believe that success reached its peak with the March 4 poisoning of former Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia,
using a Russia-developed nerve
agent Novichok. The British public was incensed that Russia put
ordinary British citizens at risk by using Novichok in public, where
anyone could be affected, but Russia made matters worse when Russia's
president Vladimir Putin smirked and gave a sarcastic answer when a
BBC reporter asked about it.
This was following by a series of moronic claims by Russia, including
accusing Britain of poisoning the Skripals in order to embarrass
Russia. Britain's foreign secretary Boris Johnson gave a furious
response to these claims: "There is something in the kind of smug,
sarcastic response that we’ve heard that indicates their fundamental
guilt. They want to simultaneously deny it, yet at the same time to
glory in it."
The Skripal poisoning was an international tipping point, uniting
Britain and other nations to no longer tolerate Russia's
strategy to use the UNSC to cripple Western foreign policy.
That's why Russian ambassador Vasily Nebenzya and other Russian
officials are so bitterly angry. The policy they had successfully
used for years is now collapsing in front of them.
Further remarks by the Russians have the appearance of hysterical
desperation. There have been horrifying videos of al-Assad's April 7
chemical attack on Douma, but Nebenzya and other Russian officials are
claiming that the chemical attack didn't even occur. They claim that
the British government paid the "White Helmet" humanitarian workers in
Douma to stage the horrifying videos as a Hollywood production. One
gets the impression that the Russians as a nation are becoming
completely delusional.
Meanwhile, Syrians in Damascus were dancing in the streets on
Saturday, because the military strikes were not as bad as feared.
Guardian (Australia) and The Hill
Related Articles:
- The world awaits Trump's promised retaliation for al-Assad's chemical weapons attack (12-Apr-2018)
- U.S., France, Britain launch Syria attack in retaliation for al-Assad's use of chemical weapons (14-Apr-2018)
****
**** Britain publishes its legal justification for military action
****
I've always believed that there was plenty of legal justification for
American and Western military intervention in Syria. After al-Assad
began targeting peaceful protesters in 2011, and particularly after he
massacred thousands of innocent women and children in a Palestinian
refugee camp in Latakia in August 2011, millions of Syrian citizens
began fleeing into neighboring countries, including over a million
reaching Europe. Any country has a responsibility to control its own
population, but al-Assad had essentially weaponized refugees. If
al-Assad can't control its own population, but instead uses
them as a weapon, then any target is justified in intervening in
the country.
In addition, al-Assad's attack on the Palestinian camp caused tens of
thousands of Sunni jihadists to travel from around the world to fight
al-Assad. These foreign jihadists formed the so-called Islamic State
(IS or ISIS or ISIL or Daesh), which has launched terror attacks on
other countries. Once again, if al-Assad can't control ISIS, then any
country threatened by ISIS is justified in intervening. In fact, the
US military intervention in Syria has succeeded in recapturing all
territory formerly occupied by ISIS, although ISIS is far from
completely defeated.
So the West certainly has plenty of justifications for military
intervention in Syria, but al-Assad's use of chemical weapons doubles
down on those justifications.
But in the end, the justification for this kind of military action has
less to do with international law, and more to do with domestic
politics. For that reason, the British government has published a
humanitarian justification policy paper for Saturday's military
action. Here's a brief summary:
The Syrian regime's use of chemical weapons is a war crime and a crime
against humanity.
Under international law, the UK may use force for humanitarian
intervention, provided that three conditions are met:
- Convincing evidence of extreme humanitarian distress on a
large scale, requiring immediate and urgent relief;
- There is no practicable alternative to use of force, if lives are
to be saved.
- The proposed use of force must be necessary and proportionate to
the aim of relief of humanitarian suffering,
The policy paper goes on to explain why all three conditions have been
met. BBC and
UK Government
****
**** Iran, Hezbollah and Syria threaten retaliation against Israel
****
Although the debate over Saturday's airstrikes has
dominated news coverage since the April 7 chemical attack,
there's a completely different parallel issue in play, which
may be even more dangerous.
On Monday last week, Israel attacked Syria's T4 airbase (Tayfur airport),
because the airbase is
considered a threat to Israel. Apparently seven Iranians were killed
in the attack.
Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah says that the attack put
Israel into direct combat with Iran:
<QUOTE>"You made a historic mistake and a great folly which
brings you into direct confrontation with Iran.
This is the first time in 7 years that the Israelis have
deliberately killed Iranian revolutionary guards. Attacking T-4
airport is a pivotal incident in the history of the region that
can’t be ignored.
Iran is not a weak or a cowardly state, and you know that well.
The Israeli have false calculation. You will have to face the
Islamic Republic of Iran.
All those thousands of terrorists in Syria do not concern the
Israeli while they have every kind of weapons, however, they are
afraid of just few revolutionary guards there."<END QUOTE>
According to the BBC, Syria, Iran and Russia are all expressing quiet
relief that Saturday's missile attack was considerably more limited
than was expected. But it did evoke a sense of greater defiance, with
the three entities calling themselves the "Axis of Resistance," and
referring to Western powers as "paper tigers," a phrase used by
China's Mao Zedong in the 1960s to describe the United States.
It's generally believed that Iran must retaliate for Israel's
airstrike, killing several Iranian revolutionary guards. This
could be a far more dangerous confrontation than even
Saturday's missile strikes.
Long time readers are aware that Generational Dynamics predicts that
the Mideast is headed for a major regional war, pitting Jews against
Arabs, Sunnis against Shias, and various ethnic groups against each
other. Events appear to be moving very quickly now. Al Manar (Hezbollah) and
Reuters and Al-Jazeera
Related Articles:
- Israel braces for attack from Iran in retaliation for Sunday's airstrike (12-Apr-2018)
- Syrian war escalates sharply, after Israel, Iran, Turkey and Russia all lose aircraft (11-Feb-2018)
- Israel and Syria have unprecedented missile clash over Jordan (19-Mar-2017)
- Syria says that Israel bombed al-Mazzeh military airport near Damascus (14-Jan-2017)
- Hezbollah building tunnels into Israel to prepare for next war (04-Jun-2016)
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Syria, Bashar al-Assad, Russia, Iran,
France, Britain, Syria, Damascus, Homs, Vasily Nebenzya,
James Mattis, Nikki Haley, Dana White, Vladimir Putin,
Boris Johnson, Sergei Skripal, Yulia Skripal, Novichok,
Islamic State / of Iraq and Syria/Sham/the Levant, IS, ISIS, ISIL, Daesh,
Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah
Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal
John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe
