Syrian Civil War

US-Backed Forces Regain Lost Villages Seized by Syrian/Iranian Troops

In an interesting development, the oil-rich territory of Northern Syria, held by US-backed SDF Forces was attacked by Syrian government troops and backed by Iranian militias. The government forces briefly took some villages before the SDF, backed by coalition airstrikes forced them back. It is the first time that Iranian militias and coalition troops have come into contact.

A U.S. army statement sent to Reuters confirmed the attack on SDF forces by what it called pro-regime forces near Deir al-Zor city and said the “coalition used established deconfliction channels to de-escalate the situation”, without elaborating.
“The coalition remains committed to our SDF partners in the campaign to defeat Daesh (Islamic State) in eastern Syria,” the statement added.
Earlier, the Syrian army said it had captured a string of villages east of the Euphrates near the border with Iraq held by Kurdish-led forces, state television said. It gave no explanation for the move.
There have been elaborate “deconfliction lines” separating the coalition forces on the eastern side of the river from the Russian and Iranian backed forces on the western side to prevent clashes, U.S army officials and defense analysts say.
Before the announcement that the Syrian army had taken control of the villages, the SDF said they were engaged in heavy clashes with Syrian army troops on the outskirts of the village of Janin near the Euphrates.
They accused Syrian authorities of seeking to disrupt preparations by the U.S.-led coalition to resume an imminent offensive against Islamic State in several pockets of territory along the middle Euphrates River Valley that they still control.
U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said on Thursday he expected a “re-energized” effort against Islamic State militants in eastern Syria in the coming days.

This is an interesting and potentially explosive development in that the Syrian government, after the chemical weapons fallout, is pushing the tempo up and with Iranian support was playing a dangerous game of chicken here.

We saw what happened in February when government forces backed by Russian mercenaries attacked a coalition base. The deconflicting lines have been broken again. And it won’t be the last time.

To read the entire article from Reuters, click here:

Photo courtesy Wikipedia

US Officials Say Both Chlorine and Nerve Agent Found in Syria Attack

The U.S. has proof of a chemical weapons attack from last week’s attack by Syrian forces and with both blood and urine samples from the victims now say that there is no doubt that they were hit with a chemical weapon.

The samples suggested the presence of both chlorine gas and an unnamed nerve agent, two officials said. Typically, such samples are obtained through hospitals and collected by U.S. or foreign intelligence assets on the ground. The officials said they were “confident” in the intelligence, though not 100 percent sure.
The Assad regime is known to have stocks of the nerve agent sarin, and has previously used a mixture of chlorine and sarin in attacks, say U.S. officials.
Officials also said that the U.S. has compiled intelligence from the U.S. and other countries, including images, that indicate the Syrian government was behind the weekend attack.
Activists and aid groups say that dozens died in Saturday’s airborne assault on Douma, the last rebel stronghold in eastern Ghouta, which has been subjected to intensive bombing by Syria’s Russian-backed Assad regime.
Russia and Syria have denied any involvement in the alleged chemical attack.
U.S. officials say the Assad regime has conducted multiple chlorine attacks on rebels during the past six months.

Intelligence officials are presenting their findings to the President which show that the attacks clearly originated from Assad’s forces. In April of 2017, Syrian forces used a mixture of chlorine and sarin in another attack. The US responded with a Tomahawk cruise missile attack on the airbase from which the attack originated from.

To read the entire article from NBC News, click here:

Photo courtesy Wikipedia

Russian “Civilian” Contractors Return Home to Military Bases

While the Russians claim to have no control over the Russian military contractors that have been fighting in Syria, including the ones that attacked a U.S. base, once their tours of duty are finished, their return to Russia goes straight to a military base.

Reuters followed groups for Russian contractors as they left Syria and once arriving in Russia, boarded buses and drove 220 miles to the Russian military base that is home to the Russian 10^th Special Forces Brigade in Molkino.

The destination of the Russians arriving from Syria provides rare evidence of a covert Russian mission in Syria beyond the air strikes, training of Syrian forces and small numbers of special forces troops acknowledged by Moscow.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Feb. 14 Russians may be in Syria but “they are not part of the armed forces of the Russian Federation”. He referred Reuters to the defense ministry when asked why civilians fighting in Syria return to a military base. The ministry did not immediately respond.
A duty officer at the 10th special forces brigade, asked why non-military people were entering the military base, said: “Nobody enters it, as far as I am aware … You’ve seen them, okay. But you should not believe everything … You can maybe. But how can we comment on what other organizations do?”
More than 2,000 Russian contractors are fighting to help Syrian forces recapture land from their opponents, several sources, including one contractor, have said.
Reuters reporters saw a Syrian Cham Wings charter flight from Damascus land at the civilian airport in Rostov-on-Don on April 17 and watched groups of men leave the terminal through an exit separate from the one used by ordinary passengers.
They boarded three buses, which took them to an area mainly used by airport staff. A luggage carrier brought numerous oversized bags and the men, dressed in civilian clothes, got off the buses, loaded the bags and got back on.
All three reached the village of Molkino, 350 km (220 miles) south, shortly before midnight.
In the village, each bus paused for a minute or two at a checkpoint manned by at least two servicemen, before driving on. About 15-20 minutes later the buses drove back through the checkpoint empty. Publicly available satellite maps show the road leads to the military facility.

Families of contractors have confirmed that the contractors have been using the military base prior to deploying to Syria and their immediate return to a Russian military base is another sign that the government controls them far more than they admit to.

To read the entire article from Reuters, click here:

Photo courtesy Video Screen Shot

The Australian Army Chief Got it Wrong…Bring Back the Punisher

Opinion: The Chief of Staff of the Australian military, Lieutenant General Angus Campbell, Chief of Army has written a memo in which he has decided that “what could be termed ‘death’ symbology/iconography” is to be eliminated from their military culture.

SOFREP.com’s Luke Ryan wrote about this earlier this week where the general listed several examples of such iconography, followed by why the symbol negatively represents the Australian Army: “Pirate Skull and Crossbones (maritime outlaws and murderers), the Phantom or Punisher symbols (vigilantes), Spartans (extreme militarism) or the Grim Reaper (bringer of death).” Gen. Campbell believes that these symbols are counter to the ethos embraced by the Australian Army, “employing violence with humility always and compassion whenever possible.”

While the general states that the troops wearing these symbols were never presented in an “ill-intentioned manner” however he states that “it is always ill-considered and implicitly encourages the inclusion of an arrogant hubris and general disregard for the most serious responsibility of our profession: the legitimate and discriminate taking of life.”

Part of what the general is playing to is the endless battle between what the military preaches incessantly to the troops (uniformity) and the small liberties the fighting men take with their instruments of war which builds a bit of esprit de corps and is a small price to pay for a bit of motivation for the troops. Some, like the general, take uniformity to the nth degree and end up pissing off the troops to no end for no good reason.

Rest assured, Special Operations has had its share of uniformity geeks and Special Forces was certainly not immune to it. Thankfully the generation today, while serving overseas hasn’t had to put up with pedantic ravings of certain sergeant majors who couldn’t speak of anything tactically with the adults in the room, so they became the haircut, mustache and belt police. Those of our generation know exactly who I speak of.

With all due respect to our Australian brothers in arms, this general missed the boat entirely. The Australians, like the United States military, has been in this Global War on Terror since the beginning. The vast majority of the men who use those symbols are in the combat arms MOS’ and the very symbol of the Australian Infantry Combat Badge is the bayonet. There is no compassionate way to use a bayonet unless the men who trained me and countless others at the U.S. Army Infantry School at Ft. Benning are totally wrong.

To be honest here, when I first read the headline, I thought it was a joke, a hoax, not unlike the ones we see on certain satirical websites. If the general is worried about the perception of the military and the men who wage war in it among their citizens, let them take their place and put their own lives on the line.

If instead he is, and this is probably more true, worried about having everything look the same and worried about political correctness, then he needs to step back and check himself.

These things aren’t new or related to just the Global War on Terror. A scene from the film “Full Metal Jacket” from the Vietnam era had its own pogue attempts at curbing the men’s small sense of individuality.

Pogue Colonel: What is that you’ve got written on your helmet?
Private Joker: “Born to Kill”, sir.
Pogue Colonel: You write “Born to Kill” on your helmet and you wear a peace button. What’s that supposed to be, some kind of sick joke?
Private Joker: No, sir.
Pogue Colonel: You’d better get your head and your ass wired together, or I will take a giant shit on you.
Private Joker: Yes, sir.
Pogue Colonel: Now answer my question or you’ll be standing tall before the man.
Private Joker: I think I was trying to suggest something about the duality of man, sir.
Pogue Colonel: The what?
Private Joker: The duality of man. The Jungian thing, sir.
Pogue Colonel: Whose side are you on, son?
Private Joker: Our side, sir.
Pogue Colonel: Don’t you love your country?
Private Joker: Yes, sir.
Pogue Colonel: Then how about getting with the program? Why don’t you jump on the team and come on in for the big win?
Private Joker: Yes, sir.
Pogue Colonel: Son, all I’ve ever asked of my marines is that they obey my orders as they would the word of God. We are here to help the Vietnamese, because inside every gook there is an American trying to get out. It’s a hardball world, son. We’ve gotta keep our heads until this peace craze blows over.

Even back in World War II, the brass knew enough when to leave the men alone. During the earlier years of the war, any bomber pilot that flew and completed 25 combat missions were allowed to go home. That is how stacked the deck was against any crew trying to survive. The Army, even the stick-up-their-ass senior officers knew that the crew painting pin-ups or cartoon characters and such on their aircraft was a small price to pay for men risking their lives over the skies of Europe.

Andy Rooney of “60 Minutes” fame, was in 1943 a reporter for Stars and Stripes, but still the same Andy Rooney. And he flew a couple of combat missions with B-17s over Germany and reported this:

“Grim-faced Luftwaffe pilots, proud of the guts that take them within the suicide circle of a fortress formation, determined to do or die for the Fatherland, must wonder what the hell kind of air force they are up against. They come diving in, teeth clenched, hell-bent for Hitler and along with a hail of lead are greeted by the stupid grin of some absurd comic-book character, or the nude form of a pretty girl painted on the nose of the bomber they are attacking….” The art was “something else, Andy Rooney wrote.”

General Campbell’s own Twitter account showed how ridiculous this ban is by Retweeting an award some Australian cadets had won in a Land Navigation competition at West Point. Included was the USMA Logo, the Spartan helmet. Campbell wants to ban the helmet for being too militaristic.

This is the kind of chickenshit adherence to uniform regulations that pisses the soldiers off to no end. There are certain things that leaders should and must do for their troops.

Ensuring that they have the best equipment and enough supplies to do the job. Give them the best training that they can get to ensure that every one of them returns home alive. And provide them with the best leadership, which starts with a sense of mission that they can. When leaders come up with this, the troops that are supposed to be leading tune them right out and become convinced, and rightfully so, that they don’t have the troops best interest at heart.

Before Special Forces troops deploy on missions, they’d give a briefback to the commander and his staff. When it was the turn of the Command Sergeant Major, (CSM A.) to address any questions, we had one who would ask pertinent questions on mission accomplishment, the logistics of said mission and ensuring that every member of the team knew what his assigned part of the mission was.

We had another (CSM B.) who didn’t ask a single question about the mission, not one. But would tell the Team Sergeant to make sure that SSG so and so, trims his mustache and ask if any of the team members were wearing unauthorized belts or boots.

Which one would you want to follow, or have as your CSM?

In the end, is wearing the symbols of a skull and crossbones, or the Punisher a bit silly? Of course, it is, but as a lover of the Punisher logo, a sticker of it has been on my truck for years. But at the same time, shouldn’t the leaders of the military of each country have more important things to worry about than a logo of a Spartan helmet or the Punisher? You’re damned straight they do.

The Superman “S” is for honor and integrity, much like the shield of Captain America. The symbolism of the Punisher and perhaps Batman is a bit darker. For the lawbreakers or the bad guys, it means that “we’re coming for you and you’ll have nowhere to hide.”

Leave Frank Castle and the Punisher be, and let’s hope the U.S. military isn’t as short-sighted and dumb as this. The men have been at war for 17 years and we should be more concerned with getting them all home safely than if they are wearing a skull face veil or a logo spray painted on their kit.

Photo: SOFREP, Marvel

Due to Declining National Support Is a Military Coup a Possibility in Iran?

Water shortages, economic and political fallout at home, increased military presence Syria and other countries have resulted in larger protests in Iran. The government cracked down violently against the protests in over 80 cities which have resulted in at least 21 deaths.

In early February, dozens of women were arrested for taking off their head scarves and protesting against mandatory veiling in Tehran.
Later the same month, police clashed with members of the Gonabadi Sufi order, which led to five deaths, according to Gonabadi activists, and hundreds arrested. In late March, Arabs staged protests in Khuzestan province after a the national TV excluded their community from a program about Iran’s ethnic diversity. Then in April, the security forces cracked down on water shortage protests in Isfahan province. Labour strikes in various cities across the country have also persisted.
Apart from these protests, the Islamic Republic has been facing numerous social-economic and political problems, including a rapidly depreciating currency, worsening droughts and deepening military involvement in Syria. At the same time, the government has not been able to alleviate many of the root causes of these issues.
It is amid these heightened tensions that the possibility of a coup against the current government, whose term expires in 2021, has arisen. There are already some signs that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) could be moving in that direction if Ayatollah Khamenei orders them to do so.
There is a growing consensus among Iranian political elites who believe implementing radical reforms is the only solution to these crises. But reforms seem very unlikely since Iran’s dual political structure is in deadlock.
The elected bodies of the regime, including the president and the parliament are incapable of creating any meaningful change because their powers are limited by the system in place. At the same time, the unelected bodies, including the supreme leader, the judiciary, and security forces, which enjoy vast political powers, believe that it is the government’s incompetency that is causing the current problems.

There is talk among Iran’s hardliners that having a military president under the control of supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei would solve all of their domestic and economic issues.

To read the entire article from Al Jazeera click here:

Photo courtesy Wikipedia

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

US Tries to Send a US Citizen Caught Fighting for ISIS to Saudi Arabia

The United States wants to send to Saudi Arabia a U.S. citizen who was captured on the battlefield in Syria last fall and is suspected of supporting Islamic State.

Lawyers for the American, who is identified only as John Doe in court papers, claim that would violate his constitutional rights and asked a federal judge to order the government either to charge him with a crime or to release him from U.S. military custody in Iraq.
On Thursday evening, U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan barred the government from transferring him, just before the deadline. During a court hearing Thursday, Chutkan seemed skeptical of government arguments that the transfer should be approved quickly.
“I have a U.S. citizen here that has rights that have to be considered carefully,” Chutkan said, adding that the right to challenge detention by the government is the “bedrock of our legal system.”
James M. Burnham, senior counsel at the Justice Department, argued that handing over the suspect would amount to a release from U.S. custody, and therefore would end his legal case in U.S. courts.
“It’s not release if you’re simply giving him over to another jailer,” Chutkan told him.
The strange case of the mystery American could set new legal and diplomatic boundaries for the U.S. war on terrorism.
Although dozens of Americans were charged and convicted of seeking to join or providing material support to terrorist groups in recent years, only a handful were designated enemy combatants. Courts ruled they still had their rights as U.S. citizens.
In September, the man surrendered to a Syrian Kurdish militia backed by the United States and was delivered to the U.S. military, which declared him an enemy combatant and put him in a military prison in Iraq.
U.S. authorities allege that the man supported Islamic State but they have been unable to produce enough evidence to charge him with a crime.

The man was questioned by US intelligence agents after his surrender but the courts are blocking that testimony and it can’t be used against him. The ACLU is trying to secure the man’s release. He claims he went to Syria as a freelance journalist and was kidnapped by ISIS.

To read the entire article from Los Angeles Times, click here:

Photo courtesy AP

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