Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

The proverb “revenge is a dish best served cold” traces to French (“La vengeance se mange froide”), appearing in English literature by the 19th century. Most Americans do not know the French orign of the proverb… 

It entered popular culture thanks to Star Trek. In Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982), Khan Noonien Singh delivers the line during a tense video call with Admiral Kirk:

Ah, Kirk, my old friend… do you know the Klingon proverb? ‘Revenge is a dish best served cold.’ And it is very cold…

As the war against Iran continues to escalate, Russia finds itself in a powerful position to deal with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), which has kowtowed to the United States and allowed the US to dominate militarily the Persian Gulf on behalf of Israel, and India, which has taken advantage of their long friendship with Russia to engage in a disgustingly abject act of sycophancy with Israel at the expense of fellow BRICS member Iran. Russia has delivered a firm diplomatic message to both.

During an Ambassadorial Roundtable in Moscow on March 5, 2026, Sergei Lavrov addressed the Ambassadors from the GCC countries, who had come to Moscow seeking Putin’s intervention in shutting down Iran’s military operations in retaliation for the sneak attack by Israel and the United States. The event was supposed to focus on the Ukrainian crisis, digital threats, and international information security, but Lavrov devoted significant time to the escalating Middle East conflict, particularly the US-Israeli military strikes on Iran and Iran’s retaliatory actions affecting Gulf states.

The GCC ambassadors reportedly urged Russia to pressure Iran to de-escalate and halt its missile/drone strikes on or over their territories (e.g., targeting US/Israeli-linked sites). Lavrov responded critically and pointedly rejected a one-sided approach. Lavrov shut them down in an extraordinary display of tough love. I’ve posted the video of his remarks below.

Lavrov began by expressing condolences for civilian casualties and damage to civilian infrastructure in Persian Gulf countries caused by the ongoing conflict. But he immediately challenged the GCC’s selective criticism… He asked whether they had condemned the “US-Israeli war of aggression against Iran” or specific incidents like the reported killing of 170 schoolgirls in Minab by US/Israeli actions). Ouch!

He continued by highlighting their hypocrisy in pushing for pressure only on Iran while not equally condemning the initiators (US and Israel), noting that accepting such a request would imply acceptance of the original aggression.

Lavrov asserted that the ongoing US and Israeli operations were aimed at driving a wedge between Iran and its Arab neighbors (GCC states), noting that these actions were an attempt to sabotage recent positive normalization trends (e.g., Saudi-Iran rapprochement, UAE/Iran engagement).

He advocated for a unified, balanced international response: an immediate cessation of all hostilities (not just Iranian ones), political/diplomatic settlement, and safeguarding legitimate security interests of all Persian Gulf states.

He reminded the Ambassadors that Russia has long promoted a Concept of Collective Security in the Persian Gulf (for over 20 years) and expressed appreciation for GCC efforts in this regard (e.g., trilateral talks in Abu Dhabi). He concluded by calling on the GCC and others to add their voices to calls for de-escalation and against selective UN resolutions (e.g., any Bahrain-proposed draft condemning only Iran). Without issuing a direct threat, Lavrov was putting the GCC on notice that Russia expected them to hold Israel and the United States accountable for the economic disaster that is confronting the GCC.

Then there is India. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent trip to Israel was ill-timed, coming three days before Israel and the US attacked Iran. Although India is one of the founders of BRICS, he made a big show of elevating the India-Israel relationship from a “strategic partnership” to a “Special Strategic Partnership for Peace, Innovation, and Prosperity.” Modi signed 16 agreements and announcement of 11 joint initiatives in areas like defense (joint development/production with tech transfer), critical/emerging technologies (led by national security advisors), cyber security (Indo-Israel Cyber Centre of Excellence in India), agriculture, water management, labor mobility (facilitating over 50,000 Indian workers in Israel over five years), culture, education, and more.

Modi, along with Netanyahu, announced the advancement of free trade agreement (FTA) negotiations (first round concluded, next in May; Modi stated a deal would be finalized “soon”). He also reaffirmed India’s strong defense and counter-terrorism cooperation with Israel, including potential transfers like Iron Dome technology. Talk about bad timing. Modi’s obsequious behavior in Israel was a direct insult to the other members of BRICS… Advocating warm relations with a country guilty of genocide has not been well-received by other BRICS members.

The attack by Israel and the United States on Iran, a member of BRICS, has created a potentially catastrophic economic problem of Modi and India. India imports the vast majority of its crude oil needs (around 85-88% of total consumption), as domestic production is limited. India’s total crude oil imports average roughly 5 million barrels per day (bpd) in recent data (early 2026 figures). The Persian Gulf countries (primarily Iraq, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates (UAE), Kuwait, and Qatar; sometimes broadly including other Middle East suppliers) are a major source, especially via the Strait of Hormuz, through which a significant portion of these flows pass. Iran’s de facto closure of the Strait of Hormuz has created an emergency situation for India.

The war against Iran has given Russia tremendous leverage over India. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, in remarks made on March 6, 2026, emphasized that Russia would not disclose specific quantitative data on oil exports to India, citing “too many ill-wishers” and security concerns. This came in response to reports of potential large deliveries (e.g., up to 22 million barrels in a week) amid India’s supply crunch. Peskov also noted the Iran war has significantly boosted demand for Russian energy resources, positioning Russia as a “reliable supplier” of oil and gas.

Russia, instead of leaving India to sleep in the bed it made with Israel, highlighted its readiness to support India, but at a cost. For instance, earlier in March (around March 4), sources indicated Russia was prepared to divert oil cargoes (e.g., ~9.5 million barrels near Indian waters) and potentially raise India’s share of Russian crude imports to up to 40%. Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak mentioned receiving “signals of renewed interest” from India in larger volumes due to the crisis.

Amid the surge in demand for Russia’s Urals crude, Russia hit India with a firm, but diplomatic, reminder of the cost of betraying a friend. Prior to the attack on Iran, Russia sold oil to India with deep discounts ($10-13 below Brent pre-conflict). While promising to help India compensate for its loss of Persian Gulf oil, Russia inoformed Modi that India would have to pay a premium of $4-5 over Brent for March/April deliveries. This reflects market forces rather than explicit “assurances” of continued discounts; some reports frame it as Russia treating it more as “business” without prior friendship-based concessions.

I am speculating here, but I think Modi is going to reconsider the agreements he made with Israel… Especially if the Strait of Hormuz remains closed for six months or more. What do you think?

Original article:  sonar21.com

El presidente sirio Bashar al Assad fue recibido en el aeropuerto por el Príncipe Badr bin Sultan bin Abdulaziz el 18 de mayo pasado en Yeda, Arabia Saudita antes de la Cumbre de la Líga Árabe.

El Príncipe Badr quien es el Emir Suplente de la Provincia de Makkah caminó con Al Assad hasta la sala de recepción donde tomaron asiento e intercambiaron obsequios. Esto marca la primera Cumbre de la Liga Árabe con la participación de Al Assad desde el año 2011 cuando Siria fue suspendida antes que comenzara el ataque de Estados Unidos y la OTAN contra Siria por cambio de régimen.

El día 19 de mayo Assad fue calurosamente recibido por el Príncipe de la Corona Saudita, Mohammed bin Salman, estrechando sus manos antes del comienzo de la cumbre. El Príncipe de la Corona fue el anfitrión de la reunión y había trabajado para traer de regreso a Assad al seno de la hermandad de los países árabes. Luego de la cumbre en la que los líderes árabes se expresaron incluyendo a Assad, los dos se reunieron brevemente.

Arabia Saudita “no permitirá que nuestra región se convierta en un campo de conflictos”, se expresó el Príncipe de la Corona, señalando “que la página sobre los dolorosos años de lucha había sido vuelta”.

Un consenso se había estado formando a través del Medio Oriente dada la necesidad de comprometer a Siria para terminar el conflicto y no hacer la vista gorda ante el sufrimiento.

Los líderes comenzaron a dar forma a la opinión que el conflicto sirio era un problema árabe que debería ser resuelto por el mundo árabe.

Desde hace mucho tiempo el Medio Oriente ha estado sufriendo la intervención occidental y Estados Unidos promovió las aventuras de cambio de régimen como en el caso de Irak, Libia, Egipto, Túnez, Yemen y Siria. El resultado ha sido catastrófico y ha dejado a esos países devastados, el más notorio es Irak que no se ha recuperado de la invasión y ocupación norteamericana. Siria necesita miles de millones y quizás décadas para recuperarse.

La Liga Árabe es solo un lugar de reuniones para ser empleado como una herramienta para reunir a aquellos con dinero para asistir juntos a Siria, como ser el Consejo de Cooperación del Golfo (GCC sigla en inglés). La economía de Siria está colapsada y necesita un flujo de dinero para reconstruir su infraestructura dañada y en ruinas debido a los años de lucha contra los terroristas armados y apoyados por Estados Unidos y sus aliados.

El proyecto de cambio de régimen en Siria de Obama-Biden dependía de la masiva participación de Turquía, Qatar, Arabia Saudita y los Emiratos del Golfo. Una vez que el Príncipe de la Corona asumió la posición de liderazgo en el reino, cambió el curso y retiró el financiamiento a los terroristas seguidores de la ideología política del Islam Radical.

Las sanciones de Estados Unidos y la Unión Europea contra Siria constituyen un obstáculo para ayudar a Siria para reconstruirse y poner fin al sufrimiento de su pueblo, incluyendo traer de regreso a los refugiados en el extranjero. Los Emiratos Árabes Unidos y Arabia Saudita esperan poder trabajar por el levantamiento o rebaja de las sanciones con el propósito de ayudar al pueblo sirio a recuperarse.

El Príncipe de la Corona es un dirigente independiente que toma decisiones de manera independiente según el mejor interés de su país, lo cual no siempre está alineado con las directivas de Estados Unidos emanadas desde la Oficina Oval. Ha tomado varias iniciativas que le hacen saber a Washington que el reino está primero, tal como cuando él declinó aumentar la producción de petróleo luego que el presidente Biden le solicitara que bombeara más petróleo para bajar los precios de la gasolina a los consumidores norteamericanos.

El actual gobierno saudita está en la cumbre de su poder y recuerda los días del rey Faisal que suspendió el suministro de petróleo a Estados Unidos luego que el presidente Richard Nixon entregara 2,2 mil millones de dólares a Israel durante la guerra del mes de octubre de 1973.

El hijo del rey Faisal, el príncipe Turki Al Faisal Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, el ex jefe de la inteligencia saudita se leve a menudo de pie a la derecha del Príncipe de la Corona, Mohammed bin Salman. El príncipe Turki concedió una entrevista en la cual señaló que el reino asumió una estricta posición hacia Israel hace décadas y que no normalizará las relaciones hasta que se alcance una solución al conflicto Palestino-Israelí.

Hubo una vez en que Arabia Saudita estuvo profundamente influenciada por Estados Unidos y esto condujo a que se viera involucrada en el ataque por un cambio de régimen en Siria. Esa influencia se ha disipado en la medida que Estados Unidos ha abandonado el Medio Oriente y se ha enfocado en debilitar a Rusia a través de la guerra promovida por este en Ucrania.

Con Estados Unidos enfocado en otra parte, China se hizo presente como pacifista y gestionó un acuerdo entre Arabia Saudita e Irán que podría terminar la guerra en Yemen y pavimentar el camino para invitar a Siria para que regrese a la Liga Árabe y restablecer las relaciones con Arabia Saudita.

La Visión Saudita del 2030 se trata de un marco estratégico para reducir la dependencia de Arabia Saudita del petróleo, diversificar su economía y desarrollar sectores de los servicios públicos tales como la salud, educación, infraestructura, recreación y turismo.

Este ha sido el hijo predilecto del Principe de la Corona, Mohammed bin Salam y para lanzarlo él necesita paz, estabilidad y prosperidad en la región.

También necesita dirigentes fuertes en la región y Assad se ha demostrado capaz de restablecer la seguridad en una zona de guerra de proporciones internacionales, en tanto Estados Unidos, la OTAN, la Unión Europea y aliados de Estados Unidos están suministrando, financiando y apoyando la destrucción de Siria durante más de una década. El presidente Trump finalmente suspendió el financiamiento del programa Timber Sycamore de la CIA el año 2017 que entrenó y apoyó a milicias armadas en Siria.

Qatar y Marruecos han resistido la normalización de las relaciones con Siria. La razón principal es su alianza con Estados Unidos y su patrón de acatar las directivas escritas en Washington.

Qatar ha tratado de promover su línea dura anti Assad pero estando del lado del pueblo sirio, por la justicia social y los movimientos de base en oposición a los regímenes autocráticos árabes. No obstante, Qatar está gobernado por un príncipe que es un líder autoritario, donde no hay elecciones o instituciones democráticas.

El Emir de Qatar, Sheikh Tamin bin Hamad al-Thani llegó a Yeda, estrechó manos con el Príncipe de la Corona y luego de manera abrupta se retiró antes de dirigirse a la cumbre. La agencia de noticias del estado sirio señaló que él había estrechado manos con Assad antes de retirarse.

El discurso de Assad en la cumbre destacó “el peligro del pensamiento expansionista otomano” describiéndolo como influido por la Hermandad Musulmana. Esto fue en referencia al presidente Erdogan de Turquía y su apoyo a los terroristas en Siria y la prolongada ocupación turca de Siria.

La Hermandad Musulmana es una agrupación terrorista global puesta fuera de la ley en Arabia Saudita, Emiratos Árabes Unidos, Siria y Egipto, pero todavía es apoyada por Turquía y Qatar.

Vedant Patel, vocero del Departamento de Estado de Estados Unidos dijo que “tenemos un cierto número de objetivos compartidos” tales como traer a casa a Austin Tice, un ex marine norteamericano que desapareció en Siria el año 2012. La posición oficial de Estados Unidos está en contra de todos los esfuerzos pacifistas de parte del Mundo Árabe hacia Siria.

Aunque las sanciones de Estados Unidos han impedido que los medicamentos para quimioterapia ingresaran a Siria en el pasado, recientemente Estados Unidos han bloqueado la ayuda de este y de la Unión Europea para las víctimas del terremoto en Latakia y Aleppo. Estados Unidos insiste en mantener las sanciones aun sabiendo que estas no tumbarán al gobierno y que solo harán sufrir a civiles inocentes.

El presidente ucraniano Volodymyr Zelensky, asistió a la cumbre y el Príncipe de la Corona Mohammed reiteró la disposición de Riyadh para mediar en la guerra con Rusia. Al dirigirse a la cumbre, Zelensky solicitó a los delegados apoyar la fórmula de Ucrania para la paz y agradeció a Riyadh por su gestión mediando en la liberación de prisioneros el año pasado.

Los estados árabes del Golfo trataron de permanecer neutrales respecto del conflicto en Ucrania a pesar de la presión occidental. Rusia es un miembro OPEC+ lo cual vincula a Putin con las monarquías del Golfo ricas en petróleo.

Aunque ahora haya alguna división entre Qatar y Siria, estos están unidos en su apoyo a la búsqueda de la libertad para Palestina, lo cual ha sido una fuente de conflictos y extremismos en el mundo árabe por lo menos durante setenta años. Bajo este nuevo liderazgo, nueva visión y nuevas metas el Mundo Árabe podría estar ingresando a una edad de oro.

Traducción desde el inglés por Sergio R. Anacona

Siria ha sido reinstaurada como miembro de la Liga Árabe….

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/5/7/arab-league-agrees-to-bring-syria-back-into-its-fold

la cual se reunirá el día 19 de mayo en Riyadh. Luego de doce años de ausencia, Siria se encuentra en medio de la vía árabe de normalización política en la región. El motor regional: Arabia Saudita….

https://english-alarabia.net/News/saudi-arabia/2023/04/20/Saudi-Arabia-s-recent-economic-and-political-development-from-Iran-to-Syria-to-Yemen

y la visión del Príncipe de la Corona Mohammed bin Salman han asumido la posición central en las relaciones diplomáticas ante las persistentes crisis.

Los ministros de relaciones exteriores de los estados miembros de la Liga Árabe votaron en el Cairo el domingo pasado el regreso de Siria a la hermandad diplomática de la Liga.

Damasco ha sido el lugar de los recientes esfuerzos por la normalización. Jordania ha planteado una iniciativa para alcanzar un acuerdo político pacífico al conflicto en Siria. Las sublevaciones respaldadas por Occidente y los conflictos que han plagado el Medio Oriente y continúan haciéndolo. No obstante, existen indicios de cambio presentes a través de las arenas del desierto y los actores regionales están rechazando el status quo.

El ataque de Estados Unidos y la OTAN por cambio de régimen involucró a naciones árabes y occidentales como participantes, pero el plan falló. El conflicto armado planificado y ejecutado por el presidente Obama y el vicepresidente Biden mató a miles de personas y desplazó a millones de personas.

Posteriormente el terremoto del 6 de febrero pasado en Siria y Turquía, la restauración de los lazos con Damasco se inició con una descomunal respuesta árabe, incluyendo a los Emiratos Árabes Unidos y a Arabia Saudita los cuales montaron un puente aéreo para la muy necesitada ayuda para las víctimas del terremoto.

El restablecimiento gestionado por China de los vínculos entre Arabia Saudita e Irán fue un terremoto político en la región y estimuló la razón para que el Príncipe de la Corona, Mohammed bin Salman, que buscaba establecer la paz y la prosperidad en la región y alejarse de la interferencia occidental que ha sido la fuente de la agitación.

El Ministro de Relaciones exteriores saudita, Príncipe Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud visitó Damasco el día 18 de abril por primera vez en más de una década, con ambos países restableciendo embajadas y vuelos entre ellos.

El Ministro de Relaciones Exteriores de Siria, Faisal Mekdad, visitó el Reino justo unos días antes que el Príncipe Faisal visitara Damasco en un primer viaje desde el año 2011.

*Embajadas Extranjeras en Damasco*

Damasco hospeda a 44 embajadas….

https://www.embassypages.com/syria

y además existen 51 consulados. Muchos habían cerrado durante el conflicto en tanto las naciones occidentales y sus aliados árabes se habían alineado en contra de Siria en su fallido esfuerzo por derribar al gobierno secular y poner en su lugar a un miembro de la Hermandad Musulmana como aliado de Estados Unidos en Damasco.

Algunos países europeos nunca cerraron las puertas de sus embajadas en Damasco, tales como Austria, la República Checa, Grecia, la Santa Sede, Rumania, Serbia y Suecia.

Varias embajadas árabes también están abiertas en Damasco tales como los Emiratos Árabes Unidos, Bahrain, Sudán, Yémen y Omán. Arabia Saudita y Túnez declararon que ellos abrirán pronto sus embajadas en Damasco.

Los expertos esperan que pronto más embajadas sacudan el polvo de sus escritorios y reabran en tanto Damasco regrese a la vida, luego de más de una década de aislamiento.

*Siria y Arabia Saudita apoyan la causa palestina.*

Restablecer los derechos y el territorio del pueblo palestino ha sido desde hace mucho un pilar de la posición siria. Arabia Saudita también ha hecho énfasis en los derechos de los palestinos y el presidente palestino, Mahmud Abbas, el pasado 18 de abril visitó y se reunió con el Príncipe de la Corona, Mohammed bin Salman, para discutir los últimos eventos en el conflicto palestino-israelí.

Arabia Saudita denunció el asalto al recinto de la mezquita de al-Aqsa el día 5 de abril y rechazó las acciones que “socavan los esfuerzos de paz y contradicen los principios internacionales en torno al respeto a los recintos religiosos”.

*Relaciones de China y Arabia Saudita*

El rey Salman bin Abdulaziz aprobó el Memorándum de Entendimiento que garantiza la condición de socio dialogante de Arabia Saudita en la Organización de Cooperación de Shanghai (SCO sigla en inglés) el pasado 28 de marzo.

La SCO es una organización Euroasiática política, económica de seguridad internacional y defensa. Entre sus miembros está la India, Kazajistán, Kirguistán, Rusia, Tayikistán, Paquistán y Uzbekistán con Irán listo para ingresar.

Arabia Saudita ha dependido durante décadas solo de Estados Unidos, pero ahora está abriendo sus horizontes hacia otros socios en la medida que el Reino marcha hacia el cumplimiento de su Visión 2030.

*Decisiones OPEP Sauditas*

Arabia Saudita y otros miembros productores de petróleo de la OPEP anunciaron recortes voluntarios a su producción el día 2 de abril. Ryhadh declaró que reduciría la producción en 500.000 barriles diarios a partir del mes de Mayo hasta finales del 2023.

Cuando el presidente de Estados Unidos, Joe Biden, visitó al Príncipe de la Corona, Mohammed bin Salman, le solicitó aumentar la producción de petróleo con el propósito de bajar el precio de la gasolina para los consumidores norteamericanos. No obstante, la decisión que se tomó fue la de mantener los niveles decididos durante la anterior reunión de la OPEP. Esta decisión desilusionó a Biden, pero fue luego que Biden hubiera hecho graves y falsas acusaciones contra el Príncipe de la Corona, Mohammed bin Salman en el pasado. Esto no sorprendió a nadie.

Durante los últimos dos meses el Príncipe de la Corona y altos diplomáticos sostuvieron reuniones de alto nivel con funcionarios norteamericanos, de Irán, Holanda, Egipto y China. Estas reuniones contribuyeron a marcar la posición diplomática del Mundo Árabe y solidificar la posición de Riyahd internacionalmente como una potencia en el Medio Oriente.

*Mirando hacia adelante al tiempo que hacia atrás al conflicto Sirio.*

En el mes de diciembre del 2012 la cuarta conferencia de los “Amigos del Pueblo Sirio”….

https://www.aljazeera.com/news//2012/12/12/friends-of-syria-recognise-opposition

inaugurada en Marruecos con la participación de más de cien delegados de gobierno que incluían a países como Estados Unidos, Francia, Gran Bretaña y a países del Golfo.

El ataque de Estados Unidos y la OTAN en contra de Siria a comienzos de marzo del 2011 por un cambio de régimen, creó la “Coalición Nacional Siria” (SNC sigla en inglés) que a través de los años ha sido alojada por Turquía y Qatar bajo la dirección de Estados Unidos. El gobierno sirio en Damasco fue considerado como ilegítimo y a la SNC se le brindó pleno reconocimiento político en la reunión del año 2012 en Marruecos como el único y legítimo representante del pueblo sirio.

La SNC tenía un brazo armado, también creado por Estados Unidos, a través de su programa Timber Sycamor de la CIA, que entrenaba, financiaba y armaba a hombres seguidores de la ideología de la Hermandad Musulmana con el propósito de establecer un Estado Islámico en Damasco, similar al proyecto de Estados Unidos en Egipto que con éxito instaló a Muhammed Mursi antes que fuera rechazado por el pueblo egipcio.

*El Ejército Libre Sirio*

En el año 2021 Daniel Wagner publicó….

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dark-side-free-syrian_b_2380399

en el Huffpost desde Washington acerca del obscuro y tenebroso lado del FSA (sigla en inglés) apoyado por Estados Unidos. Wagner explicó cómo los medios de prensa occidentales y de Estados Unidos estaban glorificando al FSA como “luchadores por la libertad” mientras hacían la vista gorda a los crímenes de guerra y atrocidades que cometían. Los medios de prensa corporativa jugaron un rol evidente en el lavado cerebral del público europeo y norteamericano.

Aleppo, la capital industrial de Siria fue finalmente convertida en zona de guerra y como lo explica Wagner. “La razón principal por la que Aleppo fue atacada por el FSA es porque fue y sigue siendo apoyo para el gobierno. En respuesta el FSA ha estado actuando más bien como una fuerza opuesta a la ciudadanía de Siria y no una fuerza dedicada a asegurar su libertad. Por ejemplo, en el pasado reciente robó las reservas de trigo supuestamente para los residentes de Aleppo y las vendió a traficantes privados turcos, ha expropiado reservas farmacéuticas y forzosamente las ha revendido bajo presión a sus dueños y ha saqueado escuelas. Estas no son las acciones de una fuerza de liberación.”

Al paso de los años la FSA llegó a su extinción y su socio Al Qaida finalmente se convirtió en ISIS. Estados Unidos y la OTAN quedaron apoyando a terroristas fuera de la ley, quienes además sostienen que estuvieron combatiendo en Irak y Afganistán, pero no en Siria.

Idlib sigue siendo la última provincia controlada por los terroristas dirigida por Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, anteriormente denominada Jibhat al-Nusra, anteriormente denominada Al Qaeda, dirigida por Mohammad al-Julani anteriormente ISIS. Este es el hombre que Estados Unidos continúa apoyando.

*Estados Unidos a un lado en el Medio Oriente*

Bill Burns, jefe de la CIA viajó a Arabia Saudita en el mes de abril en medio de gestiones que colocaron el Príncipe de la Corona, Mohammed bin Salman en el puesto de mando de los desarrollos políticos en el Medio Oriente. Ya no más dispuesto a ser un actor pasivo asumiendo directivas desde Washington sino ahora ocupando el sillón del director.

Estados Unidos ha rechazado el voto de la Liga Árabe para reinstalar a Siria y ha declarado que ellos siguen oponiéndose a cualquier reconstrucción de viviendas en Siria y que también se oponen al retorno del pueblo sirio viviendo en el exterior de regreso a sus propios hogares.

Estados Unidos y la OTAN exitosamente derribaron al líder libio Muammar Gadafi, quien será por siempre recordado mientras ocupaba un puesto en la mesa redonda de la Liga Árabe denunciando las directivas que cada participante recibió de parte de Washington DC., y emitiendo una profética advertencia en que un día Estados Unidos intentaría derribar a cada uno de los líderes participantes en la mesa redonda. Su discurso fue recibido con una carcajada. Pero ahora nadie se ríe.

Nota.- Sus comentarios y opiniones acerca de este artículo serán bienvenidos en

Traducción desde el inglés por Sergio R. Anacona

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was met at the airport by Prince Badr bin Sultan bin Abdulaziz on May 18 in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia ahead of the Arab League summit.

Prince Badr, who is the Deputy Emir of Makkah Province, walked with al-Assad into the reception room, where they sat and exchanged pleasantries. This marks the first Arab League summit attended by al-Assad since 2011, when Syria was suspended after the U.S.-NATO attack on Syria for regime change began.

On May 19, Assad was warmly embraced by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman as they shook hands prior to the summit commencement. The Crown Prince was the host of the meeting, and had worked toward bringing Assad back into the brotherly league of Arab countries. After the summit, in which leaders spoke including al-Assad, the two met brieflt together.

Saudi Arabia would “not allow our region to turn into a field of conflicts”, the Crown Prince said, saying the page had been turned on “painful years of struggle”.

A consensus had been building across the Middle East for the need to engage Syria to end the conflict, and not turn a blind eye to suffering. Leaders began to form the opinion that the Syrian conflict was an Arab problem, and should be solved by the Arab world.

The Middle East has long suffered from Western intervention and U.S.-led regime change adventures, such as in Iraq, Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen, and Syria. The result has been catastrophic and left those countries devastated, most notably in Iraq, which has never recovered from the U.S. invasion and occupation. Syria needs billions, and perhaps decades to recover.

The Arab League is just a meeting place to be used as networking tool bringing those with money to help Syria together, such as the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). Syria’s economy has collapsed and needs cash influx to rebuild infrastructure damaged and ruined from years of fighting against armed terrorists supported by the U.S. and its allies.

The Obama-Biden regime change project in Syria depended on massive participation of Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Emirates. Once the Crown Prince came into a leadership position in the Kingdom, he changed course and withdrew funding of terrorists following Radical Islam, a political ideology.

U.S.-EU sanctions on Syria are an obstacle to helping Syria to rebuild and end the suffering of the people, including bringing home refugees from abroad. The UAE and Saudi Arabia hope to work toward lifting or easing the sanctions in order to help the Syrian people recover.

The Crown Prince is an independent leader and making decisions in the best interest of his country, which is not always aligned with U.S. directives from the Oval Office. He has taken several steps to let Washington know that the Kingdom comes first, such as when he declined to increase oil output after U.S. President Biden requested he pump more oil to bring down the price of gasoline for American consumers.

The current Saudi administration is at the height of its power, reminiscent of the days of King Faisal who shut off the oil supplies to the U.S. following President Nixon’s $2.2 billion support to Israel during the October 1973 war.

King Faisal’s son, Prince Turki Al Faisal Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, the former Saudi intelligence chief often is seen standing at the right hand of the Crown Prince Mohamed bin Salman. Prince Turki gave an interview in which he said the kingdom took a strict stance towards Israel decades ago, and it will not normalize ties with Israel before a solution is reached to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

Saudi Arabia was once heavily influenced by the U.S., and this led to its involvement in the regime change attack on Syria. That influence has waned as the U.S. has left the Middle East, instead focused on weakening Russia through the U.S.-sponsored war in Ukraine.

With the U.S. focused elsewhere, China stepped in as a peacemaker and brokered a deal between Saudi Arabia and Iran, which may end the war in Yemen, and paved the way toward inviting Syria back to the Arab League and the restoring of relations with Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Vision 2030 is a strategic framework to reduce Saudi Arabia’s dependence on oil, diversify its economy, and develop public service sectors such as health, education, infrastructure, recreation, and tourism.

This has been the brain-child of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, and to pull it off he needs peace, stability and prosperity in the region.

He also needs strong leaders in the region, and Assad has proven capable of restoring security to a war zone of international proportions, when the U.S., NATO, EU and U.S. allies were supplying, funding and supporting the destruction of Syria for over a decade. President Trump finally cut the funding for the CIA program Timber Sycamore in 2017, which trained and supported the armed fighters in Syria.

Qatar and Morocco have resisted normalizing relations with Syria. The chief reason is their alliance with the U.S., and their pattern of following directives written in Washington.

Qatar has tried to spin their hardline anti-Assad stance as being on the side of the Syrian people, social justice and grassroots movements, and opposed to autocratic Arab regimes. However, Qatar is governed by a Prince who is an authoritarian leader, with no elections, or democratic institutions.

Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani arrived in Jeddah, shook hands with the Crown Prince, and then left abruptly before addressing the summit. The Syrian state news agency said he shook hands with Assad before leaving.

Assad’s speech at the summit noted the “danger of expansionist Ottoman thought”, describing it as influenced by the Muslim Brotherhood. This was in reference to President Erdogan of Turkey and his support of terrorists in Syria, and the continued Turkish occupation of Syria.

The Muslim Brotherhood is a global terrorist group, outlawed in Saudi Arabia, UAE, Syria and Egypt, but is still supported by Turkey and Qatar.

Vedant Patel, U.S. State Department spokesperson, said that “we have a number of shared objectives” such as bringing home Austin Tice, a former U.S. Marine who went missing in Syria in 2012. The U.S. official position is against all peacemaking efforts by the Arab world towards Syria.

Even though the U.S. sanctions have prevented chemotherapy drugs from entering Syria in the past, and recently have prevented the arrival of U.S. and EU aid to the earthquake victims in Latakia and Aleppo, the U.S. insists on keeping sanctions in place, while knowing that they will not remove the government, but will only make innocent civilians suffer.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy attended the summit, and Crown Prince Mohammed restated Riyadh’s readiness to mediate in the war with Russia. Addressing the summit, Zelenskiy asked the delegates to support Ukraine’s formula for peace and thanked Riyadh for its role in mediating a prisoner release last year.

Arab Gulf states have tried to remain neutral in the Ukraine conflict despite Western pressure. Russia is a fellow OPEC+ member, which ties Putin to the oil rich Gulf monarchies.

While there may be division between Qatar and Syria now, they are united in their support of seeking the freedom of Palestine, which has been the source of conflict and extremism in the Arab world for at least 70 years. Under new leadership, new vision and new goals the Arab world might be entering a golden age.

By Pepe ESCOBAR

West Asia is a region that is currently experiencing a great deal of geopolitical activity. Recent diplomatic efforts, initiated by Russia and overseen by China, secured a long-elusive Iranian and Saudi Arabian rapprochement, while Syria’s return to the Arab League has been welcomed with great fanfare. The diplomatic flurry signals a shift away from the Imperial “Divide and Rule” tactics that have been used for decades to create national, tribal, and sectarian rifts throughout this strategic region.

The proxy war in Syria, backed by the Empire and its terror outfits – including the occupation of resource-rich territories and mass theft of Syrian oil – continues to rage on despite Damascus having gained the upper hand. That advantage, weakened in recent years by a barrage of western economic killer sanctions, is now growing exponentially: the Syrian state was further bolstered by Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi’s recent official visit – pledging to expand bilateral ties – on the eve of Syria’s return to the Arab League.

“Assad must go” – a meme straight out of collective western hubris – in the end, did not go. Imperial threats notwithstanding, those Arab states that had sought to isolate the Syrian president came back to praise him all over again, led by Moscow and Tehran.

Syria is extensively discussed in informed circles in Moscow. There’s a sort of consensus that Russia, now concentrated in the “all or nothing” proxy war against NATO, will not currently be able to impose a Syrian peace solution, but that doesn’t preclude the Saudis, Iranians, and Turks fronting a Russian-led deal.

Had it not been for the aggressive behavior of Straussian neo-cons in the Washington Beltway, a comprehensive multi-territorial peace could have been achieved, including everything from Syria’s sovereignty, to a demilitarized zone in the Russian western borderlands, stability in the Caucasus, and a degree of respect for international law.

However, such a deal is unlikely to materialize, and instead, the situation in West Asia is likely to worsen. This is due in part to the fact that the North Atlantic has already shifted its focus to the South China Sea.

An impossible ‘peace’

The collective west appears to lack a decisive leader, with the Hegemon currently being “led” by a senile president who is remote-controlled by a pack of polished-faced warmongers. The situation has devolved to the point where the much-hyped “Ukrainian counter-offensive” may actually be the prelude to a NATO humiliation that will make Afghanistan look like Disneyland in the Hindu Kush.

Arguably there may be some similarities between Russia-NATO now and Turkiye-Russia before March 2020: both sides are betting on some crucial military breakthrough on the battlefield before sitting at the negotiating table. The US is desperate for it: even the 20th century ‘Oracle’ Henry Kissinger is now saying that with China involved, there will be negotiations before the end of 2023.

Despite the urgency of the situation, Moscow does not appear to be in a hurry. Its key military strategy, as seen in Bakhmut and Artemyovsk, is to use a combination of the snail technique and the mincing machine. The ultimate goal is to demilitarize NATO as a whole rather than just Ukraine, and so far, it appears to be working brilliantly.

Russia is in it for the long haul, anticipating that one day the collective west will have an “Eureka!” moment and realize it is time to abandon the race.

Now let’s assume, by some divine intervention, that negotiations would start in a few months, with China involved. Moscow – and Beijing – both know they simply cannot trust anything the Hegemon says or signs.

Moreover, the crucial US tactical victory has already been conclusive: Russia sanctioned, demonized and separated from Europe, and the EU cemented as a de-industrialized, inconsequential lowly vassal.

Presupposing there is a negotiated peace, it will arguably resemble a Syria 2.0, with a massive “Idlib” equivalent right on Russia’s door, which is something entirely unacceptable to Moscow.

In practice, we will have Banderista terror outfits – the Slav version of ISIS – free to roam across the Russian Federation in car bombing and kamikaze drone sprees. The Hegemon will be able to switch the proxy war on and off at will, just as it continues to do in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan with its terror cells.

The Security Council in Moscow knows very well, based on the Minsk farce acknowledged even by former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, that this will be Minsk on steroids: the Kiev regime, or rather the post-Zelensky regime will continue to be weaponized to death with brand new NATO gimmicks.

But then the other option – where there is nothing to negotiate – is equally ominous: a Forever War.

Indivisibility of Security

The real deal to be negotiated is not “pawn in their game” Ukraine: it’s the indivisibility of security. Exactly what Moscow was sensibly trying to convince Washington via those letters sent in December 2021.

In practice, what Moscow is currently doing is realpolitik: pounding NATO on the battlefield until they are weakened enough to accept a Strategic Military Objective (SMO). The SMO would necessarily include a demilitarized zone between NATO and Russia, a neutral Ukraine, and no nuclear weapons stationed in Poland, the Baltics, or Finland.

However, given that the Hegemon is a declining superpower and “non-agreement capable,” it is uncertain whether any of this would hold, especially considering the Hegemon’s obsession with infinite NATO expansion. “Non-agreement capable” (недоговороспособны), incidentally, is a term Russian diplomats coined to describe their American counterparts’ inability to stick to any deal they sign – from Minsk to the Iran nuclear agreement.

This incandescent mix gets even more complex with the introduction of the Turkish vector.

Turkish Foreign Minister Cavusoglu has already made it plain that if President Recep Tayyip Erdogan retains power in the 14 May presidential elections, Ankara will neither impose sanctions on Russia nor violate the Montreux Convention, which forbids the passage of warships to and from the Black Sea in wartime.

Risks of Ankara’s geopolitical shift

Erdogan’s chief security and foreign policy adviser, Ibrahim Kalyn, has aptly pointed out that there is no war between Russia and Ukraine; rather, it’s a war between Russia and the west with Ukraine serving as the proxy.

This is why the collective west is heavily invested in an “Erdogan must go” campaign, which is lavishly funded to propel an oddly-matched coalition into the presidential seat. In case the Turkish opposition wins – and their payment to the Hegemon begins – sanctions and violations of Montreux may be on the cards again.

Yet Washington may be in for a surprise. Turkish opposition leader Kemal Kilicdaroglu has implied there will be a more or less continued balanced posturing of Ankara’s foreign policy tilt, while some observers believe that even if Erdogan is ousted, there will be limits to Turkiye’s pivot back to the west.

Erdogan, profiting from the state apparatus and his immense network of patronage, is going no-holds-barred to secure re-election. Only then might he shift from hedging his bets continuously toward making a move to become a real player in Eurasian integration.

Ankara under Erdogan, as it stands, is not pro-Russian; essentially, it tries to profit from both sides. The Turks sell Bayraktar drones to Kiev, have clinched military deals, and at the same time, under the “Turkic States” mantle, invest in separatist tendencies in Crimea and in Kherson.

At the same time, Erdogan badly needs Russian military and energy cooperation. There are no illusions in Moscow about “the Sultan,” or about where Turkiye is leading. If Ankara’s geopolitical turn is hostile, it’s the Turks that will end up losing prime seats in the Eurasian high-speed train – from BRICS+ to the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and all spaces in between.

thecradle.co

Syria has been reinstated as a member of the Arab League, which will meet on May 19 in Riyadh. After a 12-year absence, Syria is in the midst of an Arab-led political path to normalization in the region. The regional powerhouse, Saudi Arabia, and the vision of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman have taken center stage in diplomatic resolutions to persistent crises.

Foreign ministers from Arab League member states voted in Cairo on Sunday to return Syria to the brotherly diplomatic league.

Damascus has been the site of normalization efforts recently. Jordan has put forth an initiative to reach a peaceful political settlement to the conflict in Syria. Western-backed uprisings and conflicts have plagued the Middle East and continue. However, there are winds of change blowing across the desert sands, and the regional actors are rejecting the status quo.

The U.S.-NATO attack on Syria for regime change involved Arab and Western nations as participants, but the plan failed. The armed conflict planned and executed by President Obama, and Vice President Biden killed thousands and displaced millions.

Following the February 6 earthquake in Syria and Turkey, restoration ties with Damascus began with a huge Arab humanitarian response, including the UAE and Saudi Arabia, which set up an air bridge for much-needed help for victims of the quake.

The Chinese-brokered re-establishment of ties between Saudi Arabia and Iran was a political earthquake in the region and gave the indication that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman was looking to establish peace and prosperity in the region, and was veering away from Western interference which has been the source of unrest.

Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud visited Damascus on April 18 for the first time in more than a decade, with the two countries also restoring embassies and flights between them.

Syrian Foreign Minister Faisal Mekdad visited the Kingdom just days before Prince Faisal visited Damascus, on the first such trip since 2011.

Foreign Embassies in Damascus

Damascus hosts 44 embassies, and in addition, there are 51 consulates. Many had closed during the conflict as Western nations and their Arab allies aligned themselves against Syria in their failed effort to remove the secular government, and instead place a Muslim Brotherhood member as the U.S. ally in Damascus.

Some European countries never closed their embassy doors in Damascus, such as Austria, Czech Republic, Greece, Holy See, Romania, Serbia, and Sweden.

Several Arab embassies also are open in Damascus, such as UAE, Bahrain, Sudan, Yemen, and Oman. Saudi Arabia and Tunisia have said they will open their embassies soon in Damascus.

Experts expect more embassies will dust off their desks and reopen as Damascus springs back to life after more than a decade of isolation.

Syria and Saudi Arabia support the Palestinian cause

Restoring the rights, and land to the Palestinian people has long been a pillar of the Syrian position. Saudi Arabia also has stressed the rights of the Palestinians and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas visited on April 18 and met with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to discuss recent developments in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

Saudi Arabia denounced the Israeli storming of the al-Aqsa mosque compound on April 5, and rejected actions “that undermine peace efforts and contradict international principles in respect of religious sanctities.”

Saudi-China relations

King Salman bin Abdulaziz approved a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) that granted Saudi Arabia the status of a dialogue partner in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) on March 28.

The SCO is a Eurasian political, economic, international security, and defense organization. Members include India, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan, Pakistan, and Uzbekistan, with Iran set to join soon.

Saudi Arabia has depended solely on the U.S. for decades but now is opening their horizon to other partners as the Kingdom marches toward fulling its Vision 2030.

Saudi OPEC decisions

Saudi Arabia and other OPEC+ oil producers announced voluntary cuts to their production on April 2. Riyadh said it would cut output by 500,000 barrels per day from May until the end of 2023.

When U.S. President Joe Biden visited Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman he asked him to increase oil output, to drop the price of gasoline to American consumers. Instead, the decision was made to remain at the level decided upon previously by OPEC. This decision disappointed Biden, but after Biden had made seriously false accusations against Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in the past, it came as no surprise.

In the last two months, Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince and top diplomats held high-level meetings with officials from the U.S., Iran, Netherlands, Egypt, and China. These meetings helped to mark the Kingdom’s diplomatic position in the Arab world and cement Riyadh’s position internationally as a powerhouse in the Middle East.

Looking forward while looking back at the Syrian conflict

In December 2012, the fourth conference for the “Friends of the Syrian People” opened in Morocco, with participation by more than a hundred government delegates, including from the U.S., France, Britain, and the Gulf countries.

The U.S.-NATO attack on Syria beginning in March 2011 for regime change, created the “Syrian National Coalition” (SNC) which over the years has been hosted by Turkey, and Qatar at the direction of the U.S. The Syrian government in Damascus was deemed illegitimate, and the SNC was given full political recognition at the 2012 meeting in Morocco, as the sole legitimate representative of the Syrian people.

The SNC had an armed wing, also created by the U.S. through their CIA program, Timber Sycamore, which trained, funded, and armed men following the Muslim Brotherhood ideology, to establish an Islamic State in Damascus, similar to the U.S. project in Egypt which successfully installed Mohammed Mursi, before he was rejected by the Egyptian people.

The Free Syrian Army

In 2012, Daniel Wagner wrote from Washington on HuffPost about the dark and evil side of the U.S.-backed FSA. He explained how the U.S. and Western media were glorifying the FSA as ‘freedom fighters’ while turning a blind eye to war crimes and atrocities they committed. The Western mainstream media played a huge role in brainwashing the American and European public.

Aleppo, the industrial capital of Syria, was finally turned into a war zone, and as Wagner explains, “The primary reason Aleppo was attacked by the FSA is that it was and remains supportive of the government. In response, the FSA has been acting more like a force opposed to the citizens of Syria than a force intended to secure their freedom. For example, it has in the recent past stolen wheat reserves intended for the residents of Aleppo and sold them to private Turkish grain traders, expropriated stocks of pharmaceuticals and forcibly resold them back to their owners, and ransacked schools. These are hardly the actions of a ‘liberation force.’”

Over the years, the FSA became extinct, and their partner Al Qaeda finally morphed into ISIS. The U.S. and NATO were left supporting outlawed terrorists, who they claimed they were fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, but not in Syria.

Idlib remains the last terrorist-controlled province held by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, formerly called Jibhat al-Nusra, formerly called Al Qaeda, led by Mohammad al-Julani, formerly of ISIS. This is the man the U.S. continues to support.

The U.S. sidelined in the Middle East

Bill Burns, the head of the CIA, arrived in Saudi Arabia in April amid developments placing Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in the driver’s seat of political developments in the Middle East. No longer willing to be a passive actor taking cues from Washington, but instead sitting in the director’s chair.

The U.S. has condemned the Arab League vote to reinstate Syria and has said they remain opposed to any rebuilding of homes in Syria and opposed to the Syrian people abroad returning to their own homes.

The U.S. and NATO successfully removed Libyan leader Muammar Gadhafi. He will be forever remembered while sitting at the Arab League round table, denouncing the directives each participant received from Washington, DC., and issuing a prophetic warning that one day the U.S. would be attempting to remove each leader sitting at the table. His speech was reacted to by laughter, but no one is laughing now.

The Arab League met in Algeria for the first time in two years, and their final declaration called for freedom for the Palestinian people who have suffered under a brutal Israeli military occupation for almost six decades. The meeting of nearly 22 nations across the Middle East and North Africa coincided with Israeli elections, which has brought to power a far-right party that wants to annex the West Bank and deport Palestinians from their homes.

Arab leaders attending the meeting tip-toed around the Abraham Accords, which saw the United Emirates and Bahrain normalize their relations with Israel, with Saudi Arabia later allowing for over-flights of the Kingdom by Israeli aircraft, and is seen as a potential precursor to wider Arab normalization with Israel.

Although the Arab world is deeply divided and polarized, the League managed to deliver a final declaration focused on the core issue of Palestinian human rights and freedom.

The Arab League General Secretariat affirmed its rejection of all Israeli settlement plans, condemned what it described as the annexation of Palestinian territory, stressed the need to compel the Israeli occupation to implement the relevant UN resolutions and work toward a comprehensive and fair two-state solution under the 2002 Arab peace initiative.

Algerian President Abdelmadjid Tebboune said, “Our main and first cause, the mother of all causes, the Palestinian issue, will be at the heart of our concerns and our main priority.”

United Nations

Secretary General of the United Nations, Antonio Guterres, attended the meeting and appealed for unity across the Arab world.

“Division opens the door to foreign, non-Arab, interference, terrorism, manipulation, and sectarian strife. But united, your leadership can shape a region that makes the most of its enormous potential and contributes to global peace and security,” Guterres said.

Foreign intervention in the Middle East has mainly come from the U.S. Muammar Gadhafi of Libya famously addressed the Arab League in 2008 and held up a paper that was sent to him and all other Arab leaders from the U.S. telling them what their agenda was to be, and the expected results of that Arab League meeting. Gadhafi went on to prophetically warn his counterparts that the U.S. had eliminated Saddam Hussein, and they could all expect they would be next.

Guterres focused attention on the continued suffering of the Palestinian people, underlining the UN’s explicit position that the occupation must end.

“Our shared goal remains two States – Israel and Palestine – living side by side in peace and security, with Al-Quds/Jerusalem as the capital of both States,” he said.

“We must do all we can to ensure the continued success of the Black Sea Grain Initiative to provide relief to those in need, including countries in the Middle East and North Africa relying on accessible and affordable food and fertilizers — both from Ukraine and the Russian Federation,” he said.

The UN is concerned with global famine due to the Ukraine war, but where was the UN when the huge wheat stores in northeast Syria were stolen by the Radical Islamic terrorists utilized by the U.S.-NATO attack on Syria for ‘regime change’? The wheat was taken to Turkey and then sold to the EU where France used it for their croissants, and Italy for its pasta.

Syria was not invited back

Syria’s participation in the Arab League has been suspended since November 2011, which demonstrates a large group of Arab nations supported the U.S.-NATO attack on Syria using the Muslim Brotherhood ideology and terrorist foot soldiers.

In July 2022, Algeria’s foreign minister decried Syria’s decade-long suspension from the Arab League during a visit to Damascus, indicating support for the war-torn country’s return to the organization under President Bashar Assad.

Arab countries have inched closer toward restoring ties with Syria in recent years, most notably the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. In October 2021, Jordan’s King Abdullah II received a call from President Assad, the first between the two leaders in a decade.

“Syria’s absence from the Arab League harms cooperation between Arab countries,” said Algerian Foreign Minister Ramtane Lamamra, speaking at a news conference with his Syrian counterpart, Faisal Mekdad, and having met with President Assad while delivering a letter from Algerian President Abdelmadjid Tebboun.

Israeli elections and far-right move

While the Arabs were meeting in Algeria, Likud party leader Benjamin Netanyahu, on trial on corruption charges, was engineering his return to power in Israel through an unusual alliance with an ultra-nationalist party.

Itamar Ben-Gvir, the leader of Israel’s Jewish Power faction, lives in the illegal settlement of Kiryat Arba in the Palestinian city of Hebron. The far-right extremist leader appears likely to take a senior role in government after the Religious Zionism bloc he co-heads, with Bezalel Smotrich, became the third-largest in parliament with 14 seats, the largest gain of any religious party in Israel.

Ben-Gvir has demanded to be appointed as a public security minister in the new Netanyahu government. That position is problematic because of the history of Ben-Gvir, who has been convicted in 2007 of racist incitement and support of a terrorist group on both the U.S. and Israeli terror blacklists. In the past year, he led a settler storming of the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound and has previously acted as a legal defense for Lehava, a racist group, which has called for the full expulsion of Palestinians, and a ban on Christmas. It views Christian churches as places of idol worship. The Israeli government has long had the plan to convert churches and Bethlehem into tourist attractions devoid of any connection to practicing Christianity.

Besides deporting all Palestinians, Ben-Gvir also plans to expel Palestinians who are Israeli citizens and have been democratically elected to the Knesset, along with leftist Israeli Jews who are MPs.

“When we form the government, I will promote the Deportation Law, which will deport anyone who acts against the State of Israel or IDF soldiers,” Ben-Gvir said in an interview last August.

Ben-Gvir pulled his gun and admonished police officers responding to an altercation with Palestinians, “If they are throwing stones, shoot them.”

The path forward for Netanhayu’s government may depend on the upcoming November 8 elections in the U.S., where Republicans may make gains, which may be a green light for Netanyahu and extremism.

The settlements

The 1949 Geneva Convention, which Israel signed, it is prohibited for an occupying power to move its own population into the territory. Since the occupation of the West Bank in 1967, numerous UN resolutions affirm that Israel’s occupation is illegal, and the settlements on the West Bank have no legal basis.

Despite the international consensus, Israel continues to build illegal settlements on the West Bank, which currently number over 100, with 450,000 Israeli settlers living there, and another 220,00 Jewish settlers living in East Jerusalem.

Israel is an apartheid state

On March 25, 2022, Michael Link, UN Special Rapporteur, concluded that Israel met the conditions of an apartheid state. His findings reported that an institutionalized regime of systematic racial oppression and discrimination has been established, a system of alien rule had been established with the intent to maintain the domination of one racial-national-ethnic group over another, and the imposition of this system of institutionalized discrimination with the intent of permanent domination had been built upon the regular practice of inhumane acts.

The question for liberal western democracies is, “Can democracy, religious extremism, and apartheid policies co-exist?” A follow-up question is, “Can the west continue to support Israel?”

By Firas AL-SHOUFI

It has been ten long years since the US and its regional allies launched their proxy war on Syria, a war that caused immeasurable human tragedy and, with Syria’s diminished political role, a dangerous regional imbalance. And yet, the Gulf States and Jordan are only just waking up to the perils of leaving Syria out in the cold.

Historically, since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Damascus has maintained a high level of diplomatic proficiency and influence, even compelling the US to communicate through Damascus as a means of contact between regional powers.

Modern Syria has effectively been a bridge between the Arab states of the Persian Gulf and Tehran, a bulwark against Turkish expansionist efforts in the Arab world, and a key political factor in securing a minimum level of stability in the region.

But in 2003, the Gulf States threw their collective weight behind the US in its war on Iraq, and then since 2005, its machinations against Syria. In 2011, trembling in the wake of Arab uprisings, key Gulf States fully supported the international and terrorist proxy war on Syria, without understanding the repercussion of Damascus’ regional decline on their own fates.

Of the US’ staunchest Arab allies, only Egypt, with its deep political heritage, maintained a minimum of political-security relations with Syria, even during the days of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood President Mohamed Morsi.

Today, the Gulf States and Jordan are stuck hard between their own geopolitical and economic interests and the aggressive US decision to subjugate Syria at any cost. Their gamble on Syria’s collapse through either war or economic blockade has failed, and attempts to alter Damascus’ position on Israel, Palestine and the Resistance Axis have been counterproductive. If anything, the Syria-Iran-Hezbollah relationship has solidified and been empowered through years of fighting from the same command center.

The bloody war waged by Saudi Arabia and its allies on Yemen soon morphed into a strategic threat to the security of Saudi Arabia and to the commercial sea routes of the Gulf States. Saudi influence in Lebanon receded from its usual playground of political-economic affairs, and left Riyadh with only minor tools to sabotage and shake stability. More importantly, Syria has now become an advanced base for Russian forces, giving Moscow a strategic view of the Mediterranean and a corridor in the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative.

When Syrian forces liberated Deir Ezzor from its mercenary ISIS armies; when conflict hotspots resolved in favor of the Syrian state; when the Muslim Brotherhood’s influence crossed deep into Riyadh’s comfort zones; when Turkish pressures amassed; and when the military resistance by Yemen proved far too mighty to break; only then did the Saudis slowly start to back off.

Meanwhile, countries such as Oman, Algeria, Tunisia and Iraq, who had maintained diplomatic relations with Damascus throughout the mayhem, started demanding Syria’s return to the Arab League.

The first step in Riyadh’s ‘change of heart’ was an undeclared security–political openness to Damascus. The Saudis have slowly initiated secret lines of communications, the most prominent of which are alleged meetings between the head of the Syrian National Security Office, Major General Ali Mamlouk, and Prince Muhammad Bin Salman, and the visit of the Director of Saudi Intelligence Khaled Humaidan to Damascus in May this year.

On the agenda of the Saudi-Syrian contacts are two main items: reining in Turkey and easing tension with Tehran. An Arab diplomatic source confirms that “the Saudis would have almost opened their embassy in Damascus, had it not been for the American pressure that put brakes on the Saudi initiatives.”

The UAE, which maintained back lines of communication with Syria during the 10-year war, is today at the forefront of efforts pushing Arab states toward normalizing relations with Damascus. This Emirati role, as described by more than one observer, is driven by Abu Dhabi’s desire to curb Turkey’s regional ambitions and by a need to balance out its excessive coziness with the Israeli enemy. Sources also confirm that the UAE would have taken more impulsive steps toward Damascus, had it not been for American pressures.

As for Qatar, which still maintains hostility toward Damascus stemming from its strong Muslim Brotherhood affiliation and its functional relationship as a Turkish claw in the Persian Gulf, Doha has rolled back the inflammatory, often sectarian, language it used during the war on Syria. As reflected in Al-Jazeera’s more recent coverage, Qatar has considerably changed its tone, now utilizing the official terminology of the Syrian Arab Army SAA) and President Bashar al-Assad in its reporting. Despite this, a Syrian source say that it is “Damascus [which] has reservations about the return of relations with Doha, and not the other way around.”

In Jordan, King Abdallah’s throne is increasingly vulnerable, not to his enemies, but to his allies in the Gulf and Israel, and he has moved to strengthen his ties with Egypt and Iraq and to reestablish a relationship with Syria. Sources say Abdallah discussed normalization during his last visit to Washington, where he attempted to soften Washington’s position on Damascus. Jordan re-opened the Naseeb-Jaber border crossing to Syria in April – a vital lifeline to Jordan’s pandemic-hit and flailing economy – only to shutter it again in July when violent clashes broke out between Daraa militants and the SAA. A ministerial meeting in Amman, due to be held on 8 September between the energy ministers of Syria, Lebanon and Jordan, looks to be yet another step toward breaking the diplomatic and political siege on Syria.

In August, Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kadhimi expressed enthusiasm about inviting President Assad to participate in his heavily-publicized Baghdad Summit. It wasn’t to be. Iraqi sources told The Cradle “The French and the Turks obstructed Syria’s participation in the Baghdad summit.” French President Emmanuel Macron, appears hellbent on establishing some international credit – and the desirable optics – for France’s presidential elections in seven months. The French hadn’t spent years working to unseat Assad, only to have him show up in Baghdad standing next to their president in photo ops. Macron’s obstruction is not limited to Iraq, however, but extends to Lebanon, where the French are engaged in some serious arm-twisting to prevent an official Lebanese rush toward Damascus. As mentioned, Turkey also weighed in to nix Assad’s Baghdad visit in accordance with Erdogan’s continued hostility towards Syria, and perhaps also to outmaneuver his Emirati foes.

Of all places, the American veto on Arab normalization with Syria may ultimately meet its demise in Lebanon. Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah’s announcement that he will import Iranian fuel for the besieged Levantine state takes an axe to the meticulously-constructed US bans on Arab trade with and through Syria. Nasrallah’s decision embarrassed Washington and its clueless ambassador to Beirut, who immediately rushed to unilaterally lift the ban on fuel imports via Syria – as long as they travelled through Jordan from Egypt. The Lebanese, ultimately, won’t care where their much-needed energy supplies comes from, but this American move showed them who is actually responsible for their shortages.

General Security chief, Major-General Abbas Ibrahim, has tried several times to open up these transport channels, but failed because of Lebanese fears of American sanctions. Likewise, Lebanon’s President Michel Aoun, whose every effort and intention was foiled by a US veto. Whatever the outcome of the negotiations to import gas and electricity from Egypt and Jordan to Lebanon via Syria, the biggest beneficiary of this American opening is Damascus, which knows how to take advantage of opportunities when they fall in its lap. Syria will undoubtedly use this crack in the door to re-engage participants on various vital issues:  demarcating maritime borders with Beirut to extract oil from The Syrian-Lebanese coast, and arranging transit affairs from the Syrian Sea to the Persian Gulf through Jordan – effectively breaking the US-imposed ‘Caesar Act’ that prohibited regional financial, economic and political dealings with Damascus.

The biggest loser in all matters – from its thoroughly incompetent Afghanistan withdrawal to the collapse of its Syrian siege – is the United States of America, which will seek, in parallel with continuing – but now in the open – pressure on Lebanon, to try to reengage with Syria. US relations with Syria will never be in earnest, always with malicious intent to serve its own geopolitical ambitions at the expense of Damascus’ allies and the Palestinian issue, and so will amount to nothing other than providing further legitimacy for the Syrian state.

With Syria’s military and political stabilization now a near certainty, most Arab countries that had severed relations with Damascus have, to varying degrees, reinstated their diplomatic representatives in Syria, either by sending an ambassador or a chargé d’affaires back to the Syrian capital.

Many European countries, among them the Czech Republic, Austria, Greece, Italy, Spain and Romania, have either started or have expressed a plan to re-open their embassies in Damascus.

Syria’s return to the Arab League remains the last hurdle in the full spectrum of eventual Arab rapprochement, something that all Arab nations – and not just Syria – urgently need. The US, however, is still trying to hold the reins of that horse tightly, refusing to allow Saudi Arabia to make its decision independently. But for the rest of the Arab world and beyond, a break from that suffocating noose could well be on the horizon.

thecradle.co

Therefore, one had to assume the urgent Arab emergency summit meeting in Mecca on May 30, 2019, would have to do, though belatedly, with the ramifications of Arab states destroying Arab states, Muslims killing Muslims, Arabs killing Arabs. Or perhaps more specific urgent Arab matters such as the American recognition of a united Jerusalem as the eternal capital of Israel, the moving of the American embassy to Jerusalem, the declaration by Netanyahu of his intention to annex the major Israeli settlements with American acquiescence or with the American recognition of the Israeli annexation of the Syrian Golan, or the “Deal of the Century”. Surprisingly and unfortunately the summit dealt with none of the above.

On the face of it, the summit was an official Arab emergency summit, but in reality, it was a Saudi Arabian summit and the agenda was a Saudi Arabian agenda: Iran, which was practically the exclusive item on the agenda and in the final communique. No perceptive Arab affairs genius would have thought of an urgent need for an emergency Arab summit to deal with a presumed ‘Iranian threat’ to the Arabs. There is mutual animosity and perception of security threats between Iran on the one hand and Saudi Arabia and a very few Arab states, mostly in the Gulf region, on the other hand. However, there are no similar feelings between the majority of other Arab states and Iran.

The final communique was delivered by the Secretary General of the Arab League, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, at the conclusion of the summit. It starts with a preamble and ten operative paragraphs. Iran is mentioned in the preamble and the operative paragraphs no less than fifteen times. The onslaught on Iran full of provocations and invectives started with the preamble and moved on with gusto in the operative paragraphs.

The impetus for convening the emergency summit, as noted by Mr. Aboul Gheit, was “the serious repercussions of the attack by the Iranian-backed Houthi terrorist militias on two oil pumping stations in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the attack on commercial vessels in the territorial waters of the United Arab Emirates.”

In view of the killing and wounding of millions of Muslim and non-Muslim Arabs, the immigration and displacement of more millions, the chaos and destruction and the rendering of several Arab states as failed states, it is amazing that attacks on two oil pumping stations in Saudi Arabia, and on four commercial vessels in the territorial waters of the UAE, in which the culprit is uncertain, warranted the convening of an emergency Arab League summit to target and condemn Iran. It is made clear in the preamble, and the ten substantive paragraphs, of the communique that the culprit is Iran. But why the certainty that Iran is the culprit? Because John Bolton, American National Security Adviser, who is not known for his honesty and truthfulness, said so! Mr. Bolton said he will provide the evidence later; thus, a new legal norm: Convict then provide the evidence.

Not only the reason for convening of the emergency summit is amazing, but the content of the ten-paragraph communique is shocking.

1. Historically and traditionally, Israel and Zionism are standard features in Arab League summit communiques. Thus, the present summit communique is a first for not including the terms Israel nor Zionism once.

2. Similarly, Palestinians are a standard feature in Arab League summit communiques. Thus, the present communique is also a first for not mentioning the Palestinians once. Although, as an afterthought, the last sentence of the last paragraph ten states that the issue of Palestine is “the main Arab issue”, but it did not merit a single operative paragraph.

3. While the communique does not include the aforementioned names, it has certainly gone overboard in provocatively and invectively mentioning Iran/Iranians and often preceded by ‘condemning’ and ‘denouncing’, no less than fifteen times.

4. Syria is mentioned once in paragraph ten for the purpose of condemning Iran. It is ironic that the Arab states, who expelled Syria from the League, the majority of which were not independent states when Syria and five Arab states established the League in 1945, met in a presumed Arab League summit and have suddenly become concerned about Syria. They denounced “the Iranian interference in the Syrian crisis and its implications for Syria’s future.”

The irony is that the ‘Iranian interference’ is legitimate, because it came at the request of the legitimate Syrian government and “supported Damascus’s efforts in fighting terrorism which was supported by some of those meeting in this summit”, as noted by the Syrian Foreign Ministry.

The Arab summit in Mecca was a Saudi Arabian conference attended by Arab states to discuss Saudi Arabia’s perceived and contrived Iranian threats. Threats which are, largely, not shared by most of the Arab states, not even shared by some of the Arab Gulf states. The contention that Iran constitutes a threat to the Arab states is contentious, and irrespective of what Netanyahu, Bolton and Pompeo claim, it is Iran which is threatened by the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia.

Finally, why manufacture a new crisis, and a potential war in the Muslim Arab region which is already ravaged by a multitude of crises, conflicts and wars?

There has been much discussion surrounding the travel of Lebanese Prime Minister Saad al-Hariri to Saudi Arabia on November 4^th. Al-Hariri, who is a Saudi-Lebanese dual national with considerable business and other personal interests in Saudi Arabia apparently complied with a summons to meet with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who has been shaking up his government as part of what appears to be an attempt to concentrate more power in his own hands being marketed as a campaign against corruption. Al-Hariri was by some accounts met at the Riyadh airport unceremoniously and placed under something like house arrest. He shortly thereafter read a statement – or was it a script? – claiming that he had fled Lebanon in fear that he might be assassinated. He resigned his office and proceeded to denounce Iranian influence over his country, saying that Tehran was seeking to gain control through its dominance of Hezbollah and the acquiescence of the president, a Maronite Christian, Michel Aoun.

Al-Hariri was allowed to leave Saudi Arabia on Saturday, flying to Paris to meet with French President Emmanuel Macron, but his children and business interests are still in Saudi Arabia, suggesting that his actions will be dictated by Riyadh. Al-Hariri, a Sunni Muslim, was in Beirut on Wednesday for Lebanon’s Independence Day, where he was convinced to hold off on formally submitting his resignation to the government so more discussions could take place. This temporarily avoids a government crisis for the country, where a coalition carefully designed to balance the country’s three major religious constituencies only came together last year.

Al-Hariri’s fall from grace came about because the Saudis were unhappy regarding his reluctance to directly confront Iranian influence, best demonstrated by Hezbollah’s unilateral participation in the civil war in neighboring Syria. The Saudis, who forced through a resolution at the Arab League last weekend declaring Hezbollah a terrorist organization, would like to have its political wing out of the government completely, an impossibility given its military and political power. Riyadh is also believed to be working with the Israelis to increase pressure and create a casus belli over Lebanon to justify direct action to isolate Hezbollah. And the ultimate target is Iran with the two countries working together to roll up Iranian influence in the region starting with Lebanon, which will see increasing political and economic pressure from Riyadh while the Israelis will be standing by to intervene militarily, if necessary. 

There are credible reports that Israel and Saudi Arabia, though not bound by any formal agreement, have come to an understanding over how to proceed which will include the abandonment of a number of long established policies. The Palestinians will, in particular, be thrown under the bus yet again and have been warned by Riyadh to cut all ties with Iran. Saudi Arabia will apparently no longer push the Israelis to accommodate Palestinian aspirations for full statehood, which will mean that refugees will have no right to return under any formula for a settlement and Jerusalem will remain wholly in Israeli hands.

It is a major risk for the al-Saud Royal House to appear to be abandoning the highly popular Palestinian cause, so what’s in it for Saudi Arabia? Israeli and U.S. support for the idea that Iran is enemy number one and must be dealt with using the military option trumps anything going on in Ramallah. Leaked Israeli and Saudi diplomatic cables have made clear that Tel Aviv will endorse Riyadh’s genocidal assault and blockade on Yemen and any other comparable actions while the Saudis will in return regard the Palestinian issue as a distraction. They will use their economic leverage to compel the Palestinians to agree to an admittedly unacceptable peace plan brokered by the U.S. and approved of by Israel. The U.S. is reportedly fully on board at this point and it is believed that son-in-law Jared Kushner has been the chief negotiator for the White House.

So what could go wrong? Probably everything as most of the current initiatives being discussed are unattainable. Israel has overwhelming air and sea superiority in the region but it does not have the boots on the ground to control the land it flies over. Nor do the Saudis and Riyadh’s vision of some kind of broad Sunni front taking shape against Iran and the Shi’as is almost certainly little more than wishful thinking. Hezbollah has been preparing for war and it has considerable experience in fighting the Israelis, having driven them out of Lebanon in 2000. It has thousands of missiles of variable quality concealed in bomb-proofed sites and there are reports that there are plans to unleash them in enormous waves if Israel were to strike. Israeli interceptor defenses are formidable, including Iron Dome, but they would be unable to cope with the volume and the devastation could be enormous on both sides.

And there is no sign that the Lebanese, who have placed their army on standby, are eager to avoid a war by cutting a preemptive deal with the Saudis that would involve Israel, so the idea of starting a hot conflict that could somehow be managed which would destroy Hezbollah will likely prove to be a bridge too far for Riyadh and Tel Aviv. And then there are the Palestinians, who just might not be willing, or able, to play ball no matter how much Saudi money is being offered.

All of which could easily leave the United States out on a limb. If it climbs into bed with the Israelis and Saudis and commits to take down Iran it will wind up having to do the hard fighting in a war that could be unwinnable in any conventional sense. Russia will almost certainly be watching closely but will wisely stay out of any conflict as long as its own interests in Syria and Iran are not threatened. If “regime change” in Lebanon to weaken Iran plays out badly, which it will, it means that all parties involved will suffer from another decade of instability in the Middle East.