President Trump

Russia, China Strengthen Ties to Challenge US in the Middle East

U.S. sanctions against Russia have resulted in pushback from Moscow. The Russians and Chinese have pledged to strengthen their bilateral military and political ties to challenge U.S. interests everywhere but especially in the Middle East. Moscow has one of its biggest allies in Syria and the Russians are surprisingly taking the side of Iran as well in this latest development.

Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu met Tuesday with Air Force General Xu Qiliang, deputy vice chairman of China’s Central Military Commission, and other regional military officials as part of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in the eastern city of Qingdao. As increasingly powerful Russia and China build up their clout on the world stage, they sought a more united front against the U.S., which frequently challenged their rise.
“Time changes everything,” Shoigu said, according to the Russian Defense Ministry. “But, fortunately, it does not change our relations both personally between us and between our states, and the very close, friendly relations of the heads of our states serve as a guarantee of this.”
Shoigu praised “the privileged character of intergovernmental ties” evidenced by numerous meetings between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping, both of whom secured enough national support to extend their terms last month. He said the two nations were continuing “their strategic course toward further boosting friendly and trustworthy ties in the defense sphere,” calling this relationship “an important factor for maintaining global and regional security.”
The U.S. and its allies have accused Assad of using chemical weapons in rebel-held territory, and President Donald Trump has twice ordered missile strikes against Syrian government facilities. The U.K. and France joined in the latest and most intense round earlier this month, despite warnings not only from Russia and Iran, but China as well, all of whom doubt Assad’s role in alleged toxic gas attacks. China has also joined Russia, Iran and other countries in investing in the war-torn country’s reconstruction.

The Russians characterized the recent gas attack and resultant Allied coalition response as “Western Style”, in a play on words that may mean their dropping the pretext of no gas attack happened to the U.S. and coalition did it to allow a missile attack.

To read the entire article from Newsweek, click here:

Photo courtesy Wikipedia

Could a Clash Between Iran and the US Troops Be Coming in Syria?

While both Iran and the United States have engaged in a war of words since the fall of the Shah, their enmity has never spilled over into open conflict. But now the two sides are increasingly moving in that direction as their forces are getting within close proximity to one another in Syria.

Tensions between Iran and the United States over Syria are at the highest they have been since the country’s civil war started in 2011.

While the two countries have repeatedly voiced indignation about the other’s presence in Syria, they have not reached the point of a military confrontation so far.
While the US has targeted fighters loyal to President Bashar al-Assad who have threatened its Kurdish allies and air bases, it has not directly attacked Iranian Revolutionary Guard officers, who command both pro-Assad militias and are embedded with Syrian military units.
Similarly, while Iran has warned the US against intervening in Syria, it has not instructed the groups under its sway to target the US.
In recent months, however, questions arose as to whether the US will continue its policy of non-confrontation with Iran in Syria.
Last month, US President Donald Trump appointed John Bolton, a trenchant critic of Iran, as his new national security adviser.
A George W Bush-era relic, best known as an advocate of the Iraq war, Bolton has reportedly lobbied Trump for a more aggressive posture on Iran.
The US ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, also fueled concern about escalation when she said that preventing Iran’s entrenchment in Syria was one of the Trump administration’s top priorities.
Iran’s main regional rival, Israel, is said to have informed US intelligence officials before targeting Iranian positions in Syria, a sign of increasing cooperation between the two, according to the Wall Street Journal.
Militias backed by Iran for their part have vowed to target the US presence in Syria.
“What we are currently seeing is the most serious attempt by hawkish and conservative advisers to get the US directly involved in the Syrian war, an attempt that echoes Israeli concerns about US withdrawal plans from Syria,” said Joe Macaron of the Arab Center Washington, DC, further explaining that the hawkish position is not universally accepted.
“Trump himself and the Pentagon are resisting this temptation, Israel will most probably continue in the foreseeable future to fight its own battles against Iran.”

Right now the Iranians believe that the U.S. position in Syria is untenable and while they’ve set their hooks deep in the Syrian regime, they know that open conflict with the U.S. is counterproductive to their long-term goals. But anything can happen.

To read the entire article from Al Jazeera, click here:

Photo Syrian Army

Saudi Arabia in Talks With US to Deploy Troops to Syria

Saudi Arabia’s foreign minister has said the kingdom is in talks with the United States about sending some of their troops into Syria as part of a planned wider coalition consisting of Arab troops.

In his comments on Tuesday, Adel al-Jubeir said the deployment offer was “not new”, adding that Riyadh had previously proposed the idea to former US President Barack Obama.
“We are in discussion with the US, and have been since the beginning of the Syrian crisis about sending forces into Syria,” al-Jubeir told reporters in Riyadh during a press conference alongside Antonio Guterres, the UN chief.
“We made a proposal to the [previous] Obama administration that if the US were to send forces … then Saudi Arabia would consider along with other countries sending forces as part of this contingent.”
The kingdom announced its readiness to deploy ground troops in 2016 to fight the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, also known as ISIS) in Syria.
While Saudi’s air force partook in the aerial campaign aimed at defeating ISIL from the very beginning in 2014, the Gulf kingdom stopped short of a full ground troop deployment.
“There’s great concern among leadership inside the [US] military about the ability of Saudi forces – just look at the war in Yemen that the US has been helping them fight with intelligence and refuelling,” said Culhane.
“There have been humanitarian catastrophes, numbers of schools and hospitals that have been hit, raising big concerns among human rights activists.”

The final question about this planned Arab coalition is whether the troops of the United States will remain in Syria. President Trump has made it clear that he wants to remove the 2000 U.S. troops and keeping them there would probably not be approved by the White House.

To read the entire article from Al Jazeera, click here:

Photo courtesy Video Screenshot

Bolton Wants to Build Arab Force in Syria to Replace the US

President Trump’s new national security adviser John Bolton and Secretary of State nominee Mike Pompeo are among those pushing to build a coalition of Arab military forces that could replace US troops in Syria and serve as a stabilizing force in the region once ISIS is defeated, according to official sources.

While convincing nations like Saudi Arabia to join the cause is sure to come at a price, the Trump administration is considering an offer that includes putting a compelling reward on the table, a source close to the White House told CNN.
A similar concept was initially floated in 2013 as part of the Obama administration’s anti-ISIS strategy, but the idea of establishing an Arab force aligned with US interests recently picked up new momentum after President Donald Trump declared that he wants to withdraw US troops from Syria and have other countries “take care of it.”
Specifically, the US is pursuing contributions from Egypt, Bahrain, Jordan, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to help counter Iran in Syria by filling the void should the US significantly reduce its footprint in the country.
A source close to the White House told CNN on Tuesday that despite initial concerns that Trump would withdraw from Syria in the very near term, discussions have shifted toward developing a transition plan and that the administration is continuing its push to enlist the help of several Arab nations including Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Egypt.
This source also confirmed that Bolton recently called Egypt’s acting intelligence chief, Abbas Kamel, to gauge whether his country would be willing to contribute to the effort, a detail previously reported by The Wall Street Journal.
Designating Saudi Arabia a major non-NATO ally would formally acknowledge their standing as a strategic military partner with the US on the level of key allies like Israel, South Korea and Jordan.
“Major non-NATO status is a real feather in the cap of many nations … in a sense it would essentially cement the US as the guarantor of Saudi security for the foreseeable future,” said Nicholas Heras, a Middle East Security Fellow at the Center for a New American Security.

If the Arab nations did agree to this proposal, they’d still probably require logistical support and targeting data from U.S. satellites. So while U.S. boots wouldn’t necessarily be on the ground, the financial responsibility would still be a cross to bear for Washington.

To read the entire article from CNN, click here:

Photo courtesy Wikipedia

Military Planning for Syria, Undone by the President’s Tweets?

The President once again was tweeting wildly after the chemical attack in Syria, and was hinting at a military strike operation being planned, and possibly spelled out a decision timetable while pointing out the weapons the U.S. may employ.

“Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and ‘smart!’” he tweeted on Wednesday, referring to advanced weaponry at least 24 hours before any operation in Syria is likely to begin.
The U.S. military maintains strict discipline when it comes to discussing such operations in advance, taking the position that removing the element of surprise can render operations less effective and put troops in danger.
“The department does not comment on potential future military actions,” Pentagon spokesman Eric Pahon said Wednesday when asked about Mr. Trump’s tweet. “I refer you to the White House to characterize the president’s tweet.”
But the commander-in-chief’s statements have telegraphed U.S. military intentions, appearing at odds with Mr. Trump’s own criticisms of former President Barack Obama and catching the Pentagon off guard.
“The last thing in the world any military organization should be doing is telegraphing what you’re going to do,” said retired Army Gen. Ben Hodges. If the U.S. now opts not to conduct strikes in Syria, it would weaken Mr. Trump’s word the next time, he said. “I don’t like it.”
Gen. Hodges, now a senior consultant at the Washington, D.C.-based Center for European Policy Analysis, said he was “appalled” by Mr. Trump’s tweet early Wednesday, not only because it signaled a potential future military move, but because it could box the U.S. into a course of action.
By telling the world that the strike was imminent, the president could have put the USS Donald Cook, which is in the region’s waters and expected to be a part of any operation, in danger of harassment flights and maneuvers by Russian forces, one defense official said.
“It’s a consideration,” he said.

The issues brought forth are reasons for legitimate concern, the Syrian’s are already moving their aircraft to a Russian airbase since the thought is the U.S. will not attack and risk an escalation with the Russians. And while the Russians would know that the ship in the area would be used in any action, it makes no sense to put them in undue danger.

To read the entire article from the Wall Street Journal, click here:

Photo courtesy Wikipedia

Germany’s Merkel Bows Out of Military Intervention in Syria

Germany Chancellor Angela Merkel said Thursday that while she supports sending a message that the use of chemical weapons is unacceptable, Germany will not participate in any possible military action in Syria.

Merkel stressed the importance of a united position in response to an alleged attack in Douma that the West is blaming on Syrian President Bashar Assad’s forces.

“Germany will not take part in possible military action — I want to make clear again that there are no decisions — but we see, and support this, that everything is being done to send a signal that this use of chemical weapons is not acceptable,” Merkel told reporters in Berlin after meeting Denmark’s prime minister.
The German leader said she spoke Thursday with French President Emmanuel Macron, who has been talking regularly this week with U.S. President Donald Trump about the most effective response to the alleged chlorine gas attack.
Post-World War II Germany typically has been reluctant to engage in military action, and parliamentary approval is required for any military missions abroad. The country often has restricted itself to supporting roles, such as the participation of a German refueling plane and Jordan-based reconnaissance jets in the current international campaign against the Islamic State group.
“I think it is important to have a common line, without Germany participating militarily,” Merkel said. “If the permanent representatives in the (U.N.) Security Council were to initiate steps … going beyond the diplomatic dimension, then we will be supportive.”

When pressed by reporters, Merkel declined to answer how Germany will be supportive or if she is worried that this will escalate tensions between the United States and Russia. She did, however, say that the violations against the use of chemical weapons was a serious issue and that “the reactions will be appropriate.”

To read the entire article from the Washington Post, click here:

Photo courtesy Wikipedia

Nadia Schadlow, Deputy National Security Adviser Resigns

In another move in the big changes within the President’s National Security office, Nadia Schadlow, the US deputy national security adviser for strategy, has resigned and will leave her position at the end of the month, officials have reported.

Schadlow is the third senior national security official to resign or be pushed out in the wake of national security adviser John Bolton’s entrée to the White House. She submitted her resignation on Tuesday, according to a copy of her resignation letter obtained by CNN, and a senior White House official said she will remain in her role until April 27 to assist with the transition.
“The administration thanks Dr. Schadlow for her service and leadership in crafting the President’s ‘America First’ national security strategy. The strategy has set a strong foundation going forward for protecting the homeland, promoting American prosperity, preserving peace through strength and advancing American influence. We wish Nadia and her family the best,” White House spokesman Raj Shah said in a statement to CNN.
A senior White House official said Schadlow spoke with Bolton on Tuesday and submitted her resignation “to allow him to build his own NSC leadership team.” Schadlow offered to remain on board for several weeks to ensure a smooth hand off, the official said.
Bolton has yet to announce any new senior staff who will join him at the National Security Council, though a White House official said Bolton has begun assembling a team.
In a resignation letter to the President, Schadlow thanked Trump for “the opportunity to serve you and the American people” and said she was “proud to work with LTG H.R. McMaster and the National Security Council team.”
“Together, we captured your vision for a strong and confident American and developed your America First National Security Strategy — which turned that vision into a strategic direction for your administration,” Schadlow wrote. “And I am particularly proud that you were able to submit your NSS to Congress earlier than any previous administration…on time and under budget!”

Schadlow has gotten solid reviews for her work and has been viewed as one of the more, reliable hands guiding foreign policy in the Trump administration.

To read the entire article from CNN Politics, click here:

Photo courtesy Wikipedia

Arizona and Texas Sending 400 Troops to the Border

With President Trump’s call for more National Guard troops to be sent to the Mexican border, the state governments of Arizona and Texas have responded by preparing to send 400 troops to aid in combatting illegal immigration and drug trafficking.

Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey said about 150 Guard members would deploy next week. And the Texas National Guard said it was already sending Guardsmen to the border, with plans to place 250 troops there in the next 72 hours as an “initial surge,” according to a Guard spokesman. Two helicopters lifted off Friday night from Austin, the state capital, to head south.
The total so far remains well short of the 2,000 to 4,000 National Guard members that Trump told reporters he wants to send. New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez’s office said Friday that it had not yet deployed any Guard members. The office of California Gov. Jerry Brown did not respond to questions about whether it would deploy troops.
Trump’s proclamation Wednesday directing the use of National Guard troops refers to Title 32, a federal law under which Guard members remain under the command and control of their state’s governor. This leaves open the possibility that California’s Brown could turn him down.
Defense Secretary James Mattis Friday night approved paying for up to 4,000 National Guard personnel from the Pentagon budget through the end of September. A Defense Department memo says the National Guard personnel will not perform law enforcement functions or “interact with migrants or other persons detained” without Mattis’s approval. It said “arming will be limited to circumstances that might require self-defense,” but it did not further define that.
Deployments to the border under former presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama both occurred under Title 32. Bush sent around 6,000 troops in 2006, and Obama sent 1,200 Guard members in 2010.
Trump’s proclamation blamed “the lawlessness that continues at our southern border.” Trump has suggested he wants to use the military on the border until progress is made on his proposed border wall, which has mostly stalled in Congress.

The Arizona National Guard released a statement that their troops would “provide air, reconnaissance, operational and logistics support and construct border infrastructure.”

The Texas National Guard sent 1000 troops to the border in 2014 by then-Governor Rick Perry to aid in the stopping of illegal immigration.

To read the entire article from the Fayetteville Observer, click here:

Photo courtesy Wikipedia

Russia Warns US Against Responding to Chemical Attack in Syria

The Russian envoy to the United Nations is urging the United States to avoid taking military action in response to the recent chemical attack in Syria.

“I would once again beseech you to refrain from the plans that you’re currently developing,” Moscow’s UN envoy Vasily Nebenzia said on Tuesday.
He warned Washington that it will “bear responsibility” for any “illegal military adventure” it carries out.
But Western leaders say they have agreed to work together to target those responsible for the attack in Douma.
French President Emmanuel Macron said any strikes would target Syrian government chemical facilities.
US President Donald Trump has promised a “forceful” response, and he and his Defence Secretary, James Mattis, have cancelled travel plans this week.
Syrian opposition activists, rescue workers and medics say dozens of people died in a suspected chemical attack on the rebel-held town of Douma, in the Eastern Ghouta region.
President Bashar al-Assad’s government – which receives military backing from Russia – denies being behind any chemical attack.
The warning from Moscow came during a divided meeting of the UN Security Council which failed to pass any measures to set up an inquiry into the alleged attack.
As permanent members of the council, Russia and the US both have the power to veto. They both blocked each other’s proposals to set up independent investigations.
The US-drafted resolution would have allowed investigators to apportion blame for the suspected attack, while Russia’s version would have left that to the Security Council.
A team from the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) is due to deploy to Syria “shortly” to determine whether banned weapons were used in Douma.
But the OPCW will not seek to establish who was responsible for the attack.
US envoy Nikki Haley responded by calling the vote a “travesty”.
“Russia has trashed the credibility of the council,” she said.
“Whenever we propose anything meaningful on Syria, Russia vetoes it.”

President Trump canceled a planned trip to Latin America, giving rise to speculation that he’s planning a response with both France and the UK. A joint operation between the three nations could signal a response much larger in scope than previously anticipated.

To read the entire article from BBC, click here:

Photo courtesy Wikipedia

It is Time For Strong Action Against Assad, And It Isn’t Just a US Issue

Opinion: Once again the Syrian forces of the dictator Assad have shown the world their true colors. The chemical attack on the civilians of Douma on April 7 wasn’t the first time that Assad has used chemical weapons on his own people, nor the second.

The videos that have surfaced have clearly shown why the civilized world has banned them and made the use of a war crime. And that is exactly what Assad is, he is a war criminal and guilty of crimes against humanity. The Russians and President Putin are just as guilty as they’ve supported and enabled this murderous regime.

Condemnation from across the world was swift but with the usual trite, weak wording that is ignored by leaders such as Assad. They only understand force and that is exactly what they should get. And it shouldn’t be, which thankfully seems to be the case, of just the United States, stepping up to the plate.

President Trump, never one to miss an opportunity to take to social media, stated in his typical “understated” fashion but correctly so, that the attack was an atrocity. And he called out the Russians, Iranians and even he pal Putin for “backing Animal Assad.”

But the U.S. isn’t alone this time, the French have stepped up to the plate. French President Emmanuel Macron vowed to join the United States in coordinating “ a strong, joint response” to these chemical attacks. It was France a century ago that was the site for so many of the chemical attacks during the First World War. So they know better than anyone the

Macron said the U.S. and France will coordinate their efforts within the United Nations Security Council in the emergency meeting scheduled for tomorrow (Monday, April 9) that was called for by the United States, France, Britain, Sweden, Poland, the Netherlands, Kuwait, Peru, and Ivory Coast.

Trump promised Syria that there would be a big price to pay for yet another chemical attack on his own people. Late Sunday night, a Syrian airbase T-4 was hit with a missile attack. Syria immediately blamed the United States but the Pentagon issued a denial.

A spokesman released a message stating”at this time, the Department of Defense is not conducting airstrikes in Syria.”

“However, we continue to closely watch the situation and support the ongoing diplomatic efforts to hold those who use chemical weapons, in Syria and otherwise, accountable,” the message added.

Not much later, Syrians withdrew their accusation at the U.S. However, the Russians called out Israel for launching missiles at Syria from Lebanon airspace using F-15 fighters. Syria then claimed that its air defenses shot down eight of the missiles. The Israelis are under no illusion that if Assad and his Russian and especially his Iranian support are willing to abet his gassing of his own people, know that they’ll do the same to the Israeli population. They hit the airbase, which not coincidentally houses Iranian troops. Something the Israelis insist that they will not abide, having the Iranians establish bases so close to their border.

Last year around this time, the U.S. launched 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles at the Shayrat airfield after learning that Syrian government aircraft had departed from the airfield loaded with sarin gas for a chemical attack on the town of Khan Sheikhun. The Syrians and Russian denied that any chemical attack took place on Khan Sheikhun and that the U.S. fabricated it. This is despite the fact that the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) had come to the same conclusion, that Syria had carried out the attacks.

The Russians showed their hand in their duplicity by declaring since early March that the United States was going to try to frame Assad for an impending chemical attack. So they knew a month ago that chemical attacks were planned. But again, the town of Douma is besieged by Russian, Syrian and Iranian forces.

But thus far, the Russians won’t allow independent chemical investigators into the town of Douma to inspect the site of where a reported 100 civilians were killed in a chlorine gas attack. The only issue which could set a new precedent is that chlorine isn’t banned from the Chemical Weapons Convention that Syria signed.

While the European Union declared that an international response is called for against Russia and Syria for these chemical attacks, they’ve done nothing else…yet. But the French are stepping to the forefront. The latest attack is the “red line” that the Assad regime has crossed. France has threatened to carry out military strikes.

French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said that “the use of chemical weapons is a war crime,” and added that France will “do its duty” once the chemical attack on Douma is verified. So what does the rest of the European Union and other countries have to say about this? This shouldn’t be a unilateral U.S. response. Most of the rest of the countries of the west have gotten a free ride for the past 70 years while Uncle Sam played the bad cop every time a rogue nation steps out of line.

The time for action is now and the rest of the United Nations needs to be heard. Chemical weapons are forbidden now and haven’t been used in European battlefields since World War I. The U.S. classifies them as weapons of mass destruction.

This isn’t the first or even the second time the Assad regime has poison gassed the people of Syria. As much as President Trump can be over the top with his social media proclamations, he’s right about this. Anyone who will poison gas their own people is nothing more than an animal.

So what will the U.N. do? Will they finally step up to the plate and do something worthy of its own name? Or will it revert to what it’s done for the last 70 years or so? And word some milquetoast proclamation that says little and does even less? I am not so sure but I’m guessing on the latter rather than the former.

Photo: Wikipedia