Empowering military capability of Hezbollah in both Syria and Lebanon; this is just one of the primary consequences of Russia's military intervention in Syria. The fun part of conflict in Syria & Iraq has just started. Massive changes are underway in the Middle East. (is not just Syria).
Note: I'm pretty sure the Western countries are still in the shock of Russia's intervention and have absolutely no idea what is waiting for them in the short & long term in both Syria and Iraq.
M. Sirani 02.10.2015
Friday, October 2, 2015
The Situation in Both Syria & Iraq is Going to Be Pretty Nasty For You (The West) But in the Favor of Iran & Russia, Based on Many Reasons. You (The West) Need a Totally New Strategy.
I just warn you. I'm not in mood & have no time to write a note in this matter.
Note: Haidar Al-Abadi is welcoming Russia's military intervention in Iraq.
I remember just couple of months ago, both General Dempsey and Kenneth Pollack (Bookings Institute) in their testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee stated that both trust Haidar Al-Abadi. Following those testimonies, i wrote two short notes in this matter and briefly explained that they are wrong. Here below are two short notes i wrote in that matter.
1- You are shocking me General Dempsey.
Link: http://irancare.blogspot.no/2015/01/honestly-you-are-shocking-me-general.html
2- Iraqi Prime Minister Haidar Al-Abadi Asked U.S. For Weapon.
Link: http://irancare.blogspot.no/2015/04/iraqi-prime-minister-haidar-al-abadi.html
M. Sirani 02.10.2015
Note: Haidar Al-Abadi is welcoming Russia's military intervention in Iraq.
I remember just couple of months ago, both General Dempsey and Kenneth Pollack (Bookings Institute) in their testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee stated that both trust Haidar Al-Abadi. Following those testimonies, i wrote two short notes in this matter and briefly explained that they are wrong. Here below are two short notes i wrote in that matter.
1- You are shocking me General Dempsey.
Link: http://irancare.blogspot.no/2015/01/honestly-you-are-shocking-me-general.html
2- Iraqi Prime Minister Haidar Al-Abadi Asked U.S. For Weapon.
Link: http://irancare.blogspot.no/2015/04/iraqi-prime-minister-haidar-al-abadi.html
M. Sirani 02.10.2015
As Long As Iranian Regime's Lobbyists Are Iran Expert in Your Administration, Iran And Russia Will Beat & Humiliate & Surprise You In Every Battlefield in the Middle East.
I don't think any individual or institute or authority whether in the U.S. or the country that i live in it at the present or other EU countries dare to challenge me in this matter. You are harvesting what you have been cultivating.
M. Sirani 02.10.2015
Thursday, October 1, 2015
What Is The Current Strategy of Russia in Syria? Do You Still Think Putin is Simply A Tactician?
Briefly: This article has been written during a 30 min break, without any edit & references. Don't blame me in this matter, due to the fact that is a short note, not an academic paper or an article for publishing.
Russia has begun its direct military intervention in Syria since Wednesday. This event has shocked many and at the same time has created a hot debate among many politicians, scholars as well as journalists around the world. Some simply claim that Assad's Regime was on the verge of collapse; as such Putin would try to save the Syrian Regime by this move. Some others claim that Putin is not a strategist; he is a tactician and try to divert the mind of public opinion from current tension in Ukraine toward Syria by this move. Some like Richard Haass, the current President of Council on Foreign Relations claims that in the war against ISIS, Obama should have worked with Russia and Iran some time ago. In addition to these different analyses, there are some, who are screaming that Putin's military intervention in Syria would be finally beneficial for ISIS, due to the fact that Russian fighter jets would also bomb the Free Syrian Army and this event would create a fertile ground for ISIS, Al-Nusra Front and other Islamic radical groups within Syria. Each of these views to some extent touches some true part of the story, but the combination of all of them does not explore the final goal of Russia in this adventurous operation.
In my opinion some views such as 1- Putin wants to save Assad's regime, or 2- Russian military jets would bomb the Syrian oppositions in addition to ISIS positions and alike are some Chrystal Clear realities and to some extent shallow analyses that do not need any further explanation. My aim in this short note is to identify Putin's final goal in this military intervention. By identifying this point, then, i would examine the reliability of Richard Haass's idea and those, who like him believe that Obama should have cooperated with Russia and Iran in war against ISIS long time ago. In doing so, i would try to put my feet in the shoes of Putin and look at the whole event not only within Syria but also in some other geographical areas that Russia has some type of conflict with the West (NATO) e.g. Ukraine.
From this point of view: What would /might Putin see?
Putin would / Might probably see that:
1- Influx of refugees towards the EU and the statements of various UN and western politicians that some large number of refugees (1 to 1/5 million) will enter the EU in the next coming months. Germany alone says that it would shelter nearly 800,000 refugees. ( Sudden influx of nearly 500,000 refugees after 4/5 years tension in Syria along with these statements might have created an alarming image for Putin that it seems something might happen in Syria somewhere in the near future that all of a sudden a country like Germany, for example, has announced that it would take this large number of refugees).
2- Recent Military involvement of Turkey in the conflict. Turkey is one of those countries that no matter how, would like to get rid of Assad's regime by all means. Regarding the Syrian conflict, the Turkish policy makers have, so far, proposed many strange & to some extent, adventurous ideas such as creating no-fly zone or creating a safe haven in the northern part of Syria. In addition, there are many rumors that Turkish authority has been supporting ISIS, Al-Nusra front and some other Islamic Radical groups within both Syria and Iraq. Analyzing the credibility and reliability of these rumors and the notion that Turkey used this event for militarily crushing the PKK and other Kurdish opposition groups by this military intervention are beyond the scope of this short note. The important issue for Putin is the fact that after nearly 4/5 years, Turkey has militarily involved in the Syrian conflict (This event would probably have created an alarming image for Putin that the West might perform a direct military intervention against Assad's Regime somewhere in the near future).
3- Recent Military involvement of UK and France against ISIS facilities within Syria ( This event would have increased the probability of a possible western military intervention against Assad's Regime in the mindset of Putin).
4- The other overt, covert and clandestine military intervention of the US-led coalition including supporting and arming the Syrian rebels should be added to all mentioned above.
5- But this is not the whole story. Simply, because there is another ongoing conflict between Russia and the West, which Putin should carefully take care of that as well and that is Ukraine. Although, Ukraine and Syria are far away from each other, but from Geo-strategical and economic point of view, both of them are highly important for Russia and Putin. Any weakness in one of these two battlefields is a huge lost for Russia and to some extent would undermine the power of Russia in another battlefield. As such, Putin would do his best by all means to keep the western countries away from these two countries and he is ready to pay every price in this matter, as the experience of last two years has clearly shown. Some might wonder, what is the correlation between the tension in Ukraine and current sudden Russia's military involvement in the Syrian conflict? This is the story. At the present time, there is some type of truce between the Ukrainian authority and the rebels in eastern part of Ukraine. But NATO is not quiet. In addition, to military maneuver, arming, training, deploying forces to Baltic States and Ukraine, NATO has decided to deploy some Ballistic Missile Defense System to Poland and Romania. The idea that Poland become a host for such a defense system is not a new proposal and goes back to many years ago. The tricky point is here. In those years, the Western countries particularly the USA claimed that the deployment of this defense system in Poland is not because of Russia; it is mainly because of Iran and its secret nuclear activity & threat. Russia was strongly against such a move, event in those years. Now, the nuclear dispute with Iran has been solved, as Putin looks at this event. As such, the western countries would deploy the Ballistic Defense system to Poland and Romania in order to weaken Russian military power. As i follow the news, the western countries & NATO are trying to use some incentives and convince Putin in this matter. This idea has so far, been rejected by Russia and some Russian politicians have stated that in case of such a move by the West, Russia would deploy some of its Iskandar Ballistic Missiles close to the borders with the EU. (Deployment of such a defense system to Poland and Romania is a serious threat and would extremely weaken the Russian military power in the region; this is something that Putin understands).
6- Another news is that the USA has recently decided to deploy some nuclear bombs to Germany.
In short, Russia enjoyed the Syrian conflict in different terms in the last 4/5 years by using Buck Passing and Offshore Balancing strategies . But the combination of all issues mentioned above created an atmosphere of fear in Moscow and Tehran that the West along with some countries in the region might conduct a broad military intervention, something like Yemen, against Assad's Regime somewhere in the near future. Such a assumption 1- forced Russia to militarily be involved in the Syrian conflict; 2- forced Iran to openly and publicly deploy its ground forces into Syria; 3- forced China to deploy its military advisers into Syria.
What is the plan?
The group of Russia, Syria, Iran, Iraq and China (From behind) have decided to put an end to the civil war in both Syria and Iraq. In this respect, every individual and group (e.g. ISIS, Al-Nusra Front, Al-Qaeda, the Syrian rebel Army, etc) that fight against the political systems in Iraq and Syria would be identified as enemy and would be crushed by military forces of Russia, Syria, Iran, Hezbollah, Iraq and different other Shiite groups from the air or on the ground. In this battle, whether we like it or not, Russia and Iran have the upper hands based on many reasons including the recent nuclear deal & lifting the sanctions on Iran, which are equivalent to releasing a wounded tiger from the cage. In other words, from now on, the West should be prepared to deal with offensive activities of Iran across the Middle East and Africa. When it comes to the contemporary international laws and conventions also, whether we agree with it or not, the military presence of Russian and Iranian air & ground forces in both Syria and Iraq is legally legitimate, due to the fact that both political systems in these two countries have asked Iran and Russia to help them in war against ISIS and other terrorist groups. By direct military intervention in Syria, however, Putin would try to 1- defend and support Assad's Regime, 2- projecting the power and showing the teeth to the West with regards to both Syria and Ukraine and 3- to get some advantages from the West with regards to current tension in Ukraine as well. The current military intervention of Russia and Iran in Syria might have an extra benefit for Iran in addition to all explored above and that is facilitating extra opportunity for Hezbollah. From now on or somewhere in the future, the Israeli fighter jets might not easily be able to conduct airstrikes within Syrian territory in order to interrupt the transportation of weapons from Syria into Lebanon by Hezbollah. In other words, the current development would undoubtedly empower Hezbollah in various terms, not only within Syria but also Lebanon and to some extent in the region.
What is the options of US-led coalition at the present time?
The US-led coalition, in my opinion has three options as follows:
1- Total retreat and withdrawal from both Syrian and Iraqi conflict, due to the fact that the final outcome of this conflict would be highly likely beneficial for Iran and Russia based on what briefly explored above.
2- Continuing with military operation in different terms in Syria and Iraq and simply offering assistance in various terms to Russia, Iran, Syria and Iraq in order to defeat ISIS and other Islamic radical groups in the favor of Russia and Iran at the final stage.
3- Continuing military operation in Syria and Iraq parallel to Iran and Russia but without any coordination in order to hijack the power in both Syria and Iraq. Based on many reasons, this option would lead to a humiliating defeat, intensifying tension not only within Syria & Iraq but also in some other areas, huge collateral damages, further destruction of both countries of Syria & Iraq, high probability that the tension in Syria & Iraq would spillover to another neighboring countries and influx of more refugees towards the neighboring countries & consequently the EU.
What is the final goal of Putin following the end of civil war in Syria?
If Russia would not be able to stop NATO with regards to deployment of nuclear bombs to Germany or Ballistic Missile Defense System to Poland and Romania or with regards to current tension in Ukraine, Russia might probably deploy some of its Iskandar Ballistic Missile or more powerful weapons to Syria in order to undermine the security of the EU in retaliation.
Based on what explored above, whether some readers like it or not, agree with it or not, i should admit, that from IR & Peace And Conflict points of view, Putin is not a tactician; Putin (and his advisers) is one of the best chess players in our contemporary international politics. Some might not like it, but after Crimea , this is the second time that Putin checkmates the West & NATO. (Never underestimate your enemy= 101- IR & Peace and Conflict Course).
Considering all briefly explored above, i pose a simple question for Mr. Richard Haass and those who think like him: Do you still believe that USA and Other western countries should cooperate with Iran and Russia in this battlefields or not?
Note: You had 4/5 years time along with some golden opportunities including the fact that Iran was under severe economic sanctions and political isolation, and did nothing. The game in Syria is over now in the benefit of Iran & Russia. Like always you are just busy with some reactionary moves and as a result couple steps behind Putin and the Islamic Regime. When it comes to Syria, Ukraine, Iraq, Yemen and many other places, you don't have any reasonable & logical strategy and moreover, you are relying on Iranian Regim's lobbyists, as Iran expert, in your administration. As such, you will be beaten and surprised by Iran and Russia in various occasions.
M. Sirani 01.10.2015
Russia has begun its direct military intervention in Syria since Wednesday. This event has shocked many and at the same time has created a hot debate among many politicians, scholars as well as journalists around the world. Some simply claim that Assad's Regime was on the verge of collapse; as such Putin would try to save the Syrian Regime by this move. Some others claim that Putin is not a strategist; he is a tactician and try to divert the mind of public opinion from current tension in Ukraine toward Syria by this move. Some like Richard Haass, the current President of Council on Foreign Relations claims that in the war against ISIS, Obama should have worked with Russia and Iran some time ago. In addition to these different analyses, there are some, who are screaming that Putin's military intervention in Syria would be finally beneficial for ISIS, due to the fact that Russian fighter jets would also bomb the Free Syrian Army and this event would create a fertile ground for ISIS, Al-Nusra Front and other Islamic radical groups within Syria. Each of these views to some extent touches some true part of the story, but the combination of all of them does not explore the final goal of Russia in this adventurous operation.
In my opinion some views such as 1- Putin wants to save Assad's regime, or 2- Russian military jets would bomb the Syrian oppositions in addition to ISIS positions and alike are some Chrystal Clear realities and to some extent shallow analyses that do not need any further explanation. My aim in this short note is to identify Putin's final goal in this military intervention. By identifying this point, then, i would examine the reliability of Richard Haass's idea and those, who like him believe that Obama should have cooperated with Russia and Iran in war against ISIS long time ago. In doing so, i would try to put my feet in the shoes of Putin and look at the whole event not only within Syria but also in some other geographical areas that Russia has some type of conflict with the West (NATO) e.g. Ukraine.
From this point of view: What would /might Putin see?
Putin would / Might probably see that:
1- Influx of refugees towards the EU and the statements of various UN and western politicians that some large number of refugees (1 to 1/5 million) will enter the EU in the next coming months. Germany alone says that it would shelter nearly 800,000 refugees. ( Sudden influx of nearly 500,000 refugees after 4/5 years tension in Syria along with these statements might have created an alarming image for Putin that it seems something might happen in Syria somewhere in the near future that all of a sudden a country like Germany, for example, has announced that it would take this large number of refugees).
2- Recent Military involvement of Turkey in the conflict. Turkey is one of those countries that no matter how, would like to get rid of Assad's regime by all means. Regarding the Syrian conflict, the Turkish policy makers have, so far, proposed many strange & to some extent, adventurous ideas such as creating no-fly zone or creating a safe haven in the northern part of Syria. In addition, there are many rumors that Turkish authority has been supporting ISIS, Al-Nusra front and some other Islamic Radical groups within both Syria and Iraq. Analyzing the credibility and reliability of these rumors and the notion that Turkey used this event for militarily crushing the PKK and other Kurdish opposition groups by this military intervention are beyond the scope of this short note. The important issue for Putin is the fact that after nearly 4/5 years, Turkey has militarily involved in the Syrian conflict (This event would probably have created an alarming image for Putin that the West might perform a direct military intervention against Assad's Regime somewhere in the near future).
3- Recent Military involvement of UK and France against ISIS facilities within Syria ( This event would have increased the probability of a possible western military intervention against Assad's Regime in the mindset of Putin).
4- The other overt, covert and clandestine military intervention of the US-led coalition including supporting and arming the Syrian rebels should be added to all mentioned above.
5- But this is not the whole story. Simply, because there is another ongoing conflict between Russia and the West, which Putin should carefully take care of that as well and that is Ukraine. Although, Ukraine and Syria are far away from each other, but from Geo-strategical and economic point of view, both of them are highly important for Russia and Putin. Any weakness in one of these two battlefields is a huge lost for Russia and to some extent would undermine the power of Russia in another battlefield. As such, Putin would do his best by all means to keep the western countries away from these two countries and he is ready to pay every price in this matter, as the experience of last two years has clearly shown. Some might wonder, what is the correlation between the tension in Ukraine and current sudden Russia's military involvement in the Syrian conflict? This is the story. At the present time, there is some type of truce between the Ukrainian authority and the rebels in eastern part of Ukraine. But NATO is not quiet. In addition, to military maneuver, arming, training, deploying forces to Baltic States and Ukraine, NATO has decided to deploy some Ballistic Missile Defense System to Poland and Romania. The idea that Poland become a host for such a defense system is not a new proposal and goes back to many years ago. The tricky point is here. In those years, the Western countries particularly the USA claimed that the deployment of this defense system in Poland is not because of Russia; it is mainly because of Iran and its secret nuclear activity & threat. Russia was strongly against such a move, event in those years. Now, the nuclear dispute with Iran has been solved, as Putin looks at this event. As such, the western countries would deploy the Ballistic Defense system to Poland and Romania in order to weaken Russian military power. As i follow the news, the western countries & NATO are trying to use some incentives and convince Putin in this matter. This idea has so far, been rejected by Russia and some Russian politicians have stated that in case of such a move by the West, Russia would deploy some of its Iskandar Ballistic Missiles close to the borders with the EU. (Deployment of such a defense system to Poland and Romania is a serious threat and would extremely weaken the Russian military power in the region; this is something that Putin understands).
6- Another news is that the USA has recently decided to deploy some nuclear bombs to Germany.
In short, Russia enjoyed the Syrian conflict in different terms in the last 4/5 years by using Buck Passing and Offshore Balancing strategies . But the combination of all issues mentioned above created an atmosphere of fear in Moscow and Tehran that the West along with some countries in the region might conduct a broad military intervention, something like Yemen, against Assad's Regime somewhere in the near future. Such a assumption 1- forced Russia to militarily be involved in the Syrian conflict; 2- forced Iran to openly and publicly deploy its ground forces into Syria; 3- forced China to deploy its military advisers into Syria.
What is the plan?
The group of Russia, Syria, Iran, Iraq and China (From behind) have decided to put an end to the civil war in both Syria and Iraq. In this respect, every individual and group (e.g. ISIS, Al-Nusra Front, Al-Qaeda, the Syrian rebel Army, etc) that fight against the political systems in Iraq and Syria would be identified as enemy and would be crushed by military forces of Russia, Syria, Iran, Hezbollah, Iraq and different other Shiite groups from the air or on the ground. In this battle, whether we like it or not, Russia and Iran have the upper hands based on many reasons including the recent nuclear deal & lifting the sanctions on Iran, which are equivalent to releasing a wounded tiger from the cage. In other words, from now on, the West should be prepared to deal with offensive activities of Iran across the Middle East and Africa. When it comes to the contemporary international laws and conventions also, whether we agree with it or not, the military presence of Russian and Iranian air & ground forces in both Syria and Iraq is legally legitimate, due to the fact that both political systems in these two countries have asked Iran and Russia to help them in war against ISIS and other terrorist groups. By direct military intervention in Syria, however, Putin would try to 1- defend and support Assad's Regime, 2- projecting the power and showing the teeth to the West with regards to both Syria and Ukraine and 3- to get some advantages from the West with regards to current tension in Ukraine as well. The current military intervention of Russia and Iran in Syria might have an extra benefit for Iran in addition to all explored above and that is facilitating extra opportunity for Hezbollah. From now on or somewhere in the future, the Israeli fighter jets might not easily be able to conduct airstrikes within Syrian territory in order to interrupt the transportation of weapons from Syria into Lebanon by Hezbollah. In other words, the current development would undoubtedly empower Hezbollah in various terms, not only within Syria but also Lebanon and to some extent in the region.
What is the options of US-led coalition at the present time?
The US-led coalition, in my opinion has three options as follows:
1- Total retreat and withdrawal from both Syrian and Iraqi conflict, due to the fact that the final outcome of this conflict would be highly likely beneficial for Iran and Russia based on what briefly explored above.
2- Continuing with military operation in different terms in Syria and Iraq and simply offering assistance in various terms to Russia, Iran, Syria and Iraq in order to defeat ISIS and other Islamic radical groups in the favor of Russia and Iran at the final stage.
3- Continuing military operation in Syria and Iraq parallel to Iran and Russia but without any coordination in order to hijack the power in both Syria and Iraq. Based on many reasons, this option would lead to a humiliating defeat, intensifying tension not only within Syria & Iraq but also in some other areas, huge collateral damages, further destruction of both countries of Syria & Iraq, high probability that the tension in Syria & Iraq would spillover to another neighboring countries and influx of more refugees towards the neighboring countries & consequently the EU.
What is the final goal of Putin following the end of civil war in Syria?
If Russia would not be able to stop NATO with regards to deployment of nuclear bombs to Germany or Ballistic Missile Defense System to Poland and Romania or with regards to current tension in Ukraine, Russia might probably deploy some of its Iskandar Ballistic Missile or more powerful weapons to Syria in order to undermine the security of the EU in retaliation.
Based on what explored above, whether some readers like it or not, agree with it or not, i should admit, that from IR & Peace And Conflict points of view, Putin is not a tactician; Putin (and his advisers) is one of the best chess players in our contemporary international politics. Some might not like it, but after Crimea , this is the second time that Putin checkmates the West & NATO. (Never underestimate your enemy= 101- IR & Peace and Conflict Course).
Considering all briefly explored above, i pose a simple question for Mr. Richard Haass and those who think like him: Do you still believe that USA and Other western countries should cooperate with Iran and Russia in this battlefields or not?
Note: You had 4/5 years time along with some golden opportunities including the fact that Iran was under severe economic sanctions and political isolation, and did nothing. The game in Syria is over now in the benefit of Iran & Russia. Like always you are just busy with some reactionary moves and as a result couple steps behind Putin and the Islamic Regime. When it comes to Syria, Ukraine, Iraq, Yemen and many other places, you don't have any reasonable & logical strategy and moreover, you are relying on Iranian Regim's lobbyists, as Iran expert, in your administration. As such, you will be beaten and surprised by Iran and Russia in various occasions.
M. Sirani 01.10.2015
Exclusive: Be Prepared for A Huge Offensive Operation in Syria & Iraq; Iranian Ground Forces Have Arived in Syria.
Briefly: Russia, Iran and China (From the behind) have decided to clean up the mess in Syria & Iraq. In this respect, every individual or group, which would not be agree with political systems in Syria & Iraq would be identified as enemy.
The Western & Arab countries have three choices at this stage: 1- Total retreat and withdrawal from both Syria & Iraq, 2- Staying in Syria & Iraq and offering assistance to Iran & Russia in their favor, 3- Staying in Syria & Iraq in order to hijack the power from Iran & Russia. Based on many reasons, this option would lead to a humiliating defeat, intensifying tension not only within Syria & Iraq but also in some other areas, huge collateral damages, further destruction of both countries of Syria & Iraq, high probability that the tension in Syria & Iraq would spillover to another neighboring countries and influx of more refugees towards the neighboring countries & consequently the EU.
M. Sirani 01.10.2015
Reference:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/01/us-mideast-crisis-syria-iranians-idUSKCN0RV4DN20151001?mod=related&channelName=worldNews&utm_source=Facebook
The Western & Arab countries have three choices at this stage: 1- Total retreat and withdrawal from both Syria & Iraq, 2- Staying in Syria & Iraq and offering assistance to Iran & Russia in their favor, 3- Staying in Syria & Iraq in order to hijack the power from Iran & Russia. Based on many reasons, this option would lead to a humiliating defeat, intensifying tension not only within Syria & Iraq but also in some other areas, huge collateral damages, further destruction of both countries of Syria & Iraq, high probability that the tension in Syria & Iraq would spillover to another neighboring countries and influx of more refugees towards the neighboring countries & consequently the EU.
M. Sirani 01.10.2015
Reference:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/01/us-mideast-crisis-syria-iranians-idUSKCN0RV4DN20151001?mod=related&channelName=worldNews&utm_source=Facebook
The West Needs A Totally New Strategy With Regards To Syria & Iraq; Of Course, If It Doesn't Want to Waste Its Resources For The Benefit of Its Adversaries.
Briefly:
It's funny & shocking: You had 4/5 years time. What did you do? (Be honest with yourself and find a reasonable and logical answer to that question).
Note: 101-Peace & Conflict Course might help.
M. Sirani 01.10.2015
It's funny & shocking: You had 4/5 years time. What did you do? (Be honest with yourself and find a reasonable and logical answer to that question).
Note: 101-Peace & Conflict Course might help.
M. Sirani 01.10.2015
Wednesday, September 30, 2015
For You.
For You
For you:
- Could have
sailed in every furious ocean
- Could have
moved every rough mountain
- Could have
reached the top of the sky
- Could have
touched the sun, moon, stars
- Could have
changed the whole world
- Could have
conquered the whole universe
- Could have
crushed every mighty barrier
Only by my empty
hands and humble heart
Ooh, ooh, if and
only if you were by my side
M. Sirani 30.09.2015
When Secret Services Decide, Who Should Get PhD or Be Promoted in Educational System, Part of Your Think Thank Would Become Ding Dang. As Such, You Will Repeatedly Be Surprised Even By a Simple Non-State Actor like ISIS.
Briefly:
Which one of your Ding Dangers anticipate Russian direct intervention in Syria and its consequences?
Today, Some of your Ding Dangers have started to say: Russian intervention in Syria is just to defend Bashar Assad. hahahahaha
These genius have identified the greatest discovery of our contemporary century.
M. Sirani 30.09.2015
Which one of your Ding Dangers anticipate Russian direct intervention in Syria and its consequences?
Today, Some of your Ding Dangers have started to say: Russian intervention in Syria is just to defend Bashar Assad. hahahahaha
These genius have identified the greatest discovery of our contemporary century.
M. Sirani 30.09.2015
In An Act of Desperation & Confusion, The West (NATO) Shooting Itself in the Foot. (Who is A Bored Kid in the Back of the Classroom in the International Politics? ).
Briefly:
The west (NATO) is totally confused and have absolutely no clear effective plan or reasonable strategy/tactic with regards to neither Ukraine, nor Syria, nor Iraq nor against ISIS. The U.S. $500 million dollars plan to train the Syrian rebels has reached a dead end alley. The nearly two years airstrike plan against ISIS has not achieved any tangible success. In an act of desperation & confusion, furthermore, the West is deciding to deploy ballistic missile defense system to Romania / Poland or nuclear bombs to Germany.
I'm wondering does the West (NATO) understand that the sudden Russia's military move & involvement of China's military advisers in Syria is a natural and inevitable consequence of NATO wrong policy in the EU & Ukraine?
In case of further continuation , the west (NATO) will lose the battle in Syria, Iraq, Ukraine and beyond. I suggest those decision makers in these matters to read "Sun Tzu ( The Art of War) or follow a 101-Strategy & Tactic & 101-Policy Analysis courses. Honestly, when i follow the news, it seems to me that some of you think that you are playing a monopoly-war type game. You role the dice. If the resting position of the dice is two, all of a sudden you decide to move the ballistic missile defense system into two countries of Romania and Poland, without thinking about the consequences of such a random move in somewhere else. If is six, you decide to have a six airstrikes against ISIS in that day.
In short, based on the current international laws and conventions, this is the West that from now on should coordinate with Russia with regards to the current conflict in Syria; due to the fact that Assad's regime has officially asked Russia for help in war against ISIS. In other words, all the efforts and resources that the west has used in Syria in the past 4/5 years, should be thrown into the historical GARBAGE CAN, without any single positive result. That is the result of the western "rolling the dice policy". Do you see how a new player suddenly take the ball from some old players in the game?
Important: If the western countries do not coordinate and compromise with Russia with regards to the Syrian conflict at this stage, there is some probability that Russian warplanes would target the Syrian rebels in addition to ISIS position somewhere in the future.
Q: Who is "A bored Kid in the back of the classroom in the international politics? President Putin? looooooooool
M. Sirani 30.09.2015
The west (NATO) is totally confused and have absolutely no clear effective plan or reasonable strategy/tactic with regards to neither Ukraine, nor Syria, nor Iraq nor against ISIS. The U.S. $500 million dollars plan to train the Syrian rebels has reached a dead end alley. The nearly two years airstrike plan against ISIS has not achieved any tangible success. In an act of desperation & confusion, furthermore, the West is deciding to deploy ballistic missile defense system to Romania / Poland or nuclear bombs to Germany.
I'm wondering does the West (NATO) understand that the sudden Russia's military move & involvement of China's military advisers in Syria is a natural and inevitable consequence of NATO wrong policy in the EU & Ukraine?
In case of further continuation , the west (NATO) will lose the battle in Syria, Iraq, Ukraine and beyond. I suggest those decision makers in these matters to read "Sun Tzu ( The Art of War) or follow a 101-Strategy & Tactic & 101-Policy Analysis courses. Honestly, when i follow the news, it seems to me that some of you think that you are playing a monopoly-war type game. You role the dice. If the resting position of the dice is two, all of a sudden you decide to move the ballistic missile defense system into two countries of Romania and Poland, without thinking about the consequences of such a random move in somewhere else. If is six, you decide to have a six airstrikes against ISIS in that day.
In short, based on the current international laws and conventions, this is the West that from now on should coordinate with Russia with regards to the current conflict in Syria; due to the fact that Assad's regime has officially asked Russia for help in war against ISIS. In other words, all the efforts and resources that the west has used in Syria in the past 4/5 years, should be thrown into the historical GARBAGE CAN, without any single positive result. That is the result of the western "rolling the dice policy". Do you see how a new player suddenly take the ball from some old players in the game?
Important: If the western countries do not coordinate and compromise with Russia with regards to the Syrian conflict at this stage, there is some probability that Russian warplanes would target the Syrian rebels in addition to ISIS position somewhere in the future.
Q: Who is "A bored Kid in the back of the classroom in the international politics? President Putin? looooooooool
M. Sirani 30.09.2015
Monday, September 28, 2015
Ben Rhodes is Still Dreaming, When It Comes to Current Conflict in Syria ( Based on His Short Interview with BBC Today).
Briefly:
To the Western Politicians: You are still couple of moves behind Iran, Russia and China, although you had 4/5 years time and some historical opportunity to change the course of this conflict (Not with military intervention). E.g. the latest chemical attack in Syria, which took place on 21.08.2013. Or while, Iran was under severe economic sanctions and political isolation. You missed all those opportunities due to your miscalculation, wrong analysis, wrong policies and the lack of proper knowledge with regards to what is really going on on the ground in Syria.
At the present, 1- the international community is going to lift the sanctions on Iran, 2- Russia has directly, openly and publicly deployed its military forces into Syria and is strengthening its military position in the country, 3- China's military advisers are heading to Syria. and 4- Russia, Syria, Iran and Iraq have openly and publicly created its own intelligence ( and possibly military pack) pack against ISIS, ( but in reality against all enemies of both Syrian and Iraqi political systems).
Considering these brief information, Mr. Rhodes still thinks that the USA and the West have the upper hands with regards to the Syrian conflict; as such Russia, Iran, China and Syria should accept his offer. (wake up dear: be realistic with regards to this tension & be prepared for a long term conflict, worse than Syria in Yemen and beyond).
M. Sirani 28.09.2015
To the Western Politicians: You are still couple of moves behind Iran, Russia and China, although you had 4/5 years time and some historical opportunity to change the course of this conflict (Not with military intervention). E.g. the latest chemical attack in Syria, which took place on 21.08.2013. Or while, Iran was under severe economic sanctions and political isolation. You missed all those opportunities due to your miscalculation, wrong analysis, wrong policies and the lack of proper knowledge with regards to what is really going on on the ground in Syria.
At the present, 1- the international community is going to lift the sanctions on Iran, 2- Russia has directly, openly and publicly deployed its military forces into Syria and is strengthening its military position in the country, 3- China's military advisers are heading to Syria. and 4- Russia, Syria, Iran and Iraq have openly and publicly created its own intelligence ( and possibly military pack) pack against ISIS, ( but in reality against all enemies of both Syrian and Iraqi political systems).
Considering these brief information, Mr. Rhodes still thinks that the USA and the West have the upper hands with regards to the Syrian conflict; as such Russia, Iran, China and Syria should accept his offer. (wake up dear: be realistic with regards to this tension & be prepared for a long term conflict, worse than Syria in Yemen and beyond).
M. Sirani 28.09.2015
China’s Military Advisers Heading to Syria to Help Fight ISIS’ According to RT News Agency.
Briefly:
After 4/5 years total confusion, failure, fiasco and spending millions of dollars, the west should retreat from Syria and leave it to Iran, Hezbollah, Russia and China.
Note: The whole Middle East and Africa will gradually fall in the hands of Iran, Russia and China.
M. Sirani 28.09.2015
Reference:
http://www.rt.com/news/316705-china-syria-isis-fight/
After 4/5 years total confusion, failure, fiasco and spending millions of dollars, the west should retreat from Syria and leave it to Iran, Hezbollah, Russia and China.
Note: The whole Middle East and Africa will gradually fall in the hands of Iran, Russia and China.
M. Sirani 28.09.2015
Reference:
http://www.rt.com/news/316705-china-syria-isis-fight/
Iran's Former Ambassador to Lebanon is Among Iranian Missing Pilgrims in Mecca Incident.
Briefly:
Following the recent incident in Mecca, some Iranian news agencies revealed that some members of IRGC are among the victims or missing Iranian pilgrims in this horrific event. The recent development revealed by Ya Libnan indicates a fact that Iran's former ambassador to Lebanon, Ghazanfar Roknabadi, is among the missing pilgrims as Iran's State TV declared. There is something interesting that according to Saudi Arabia authority an Iranian pilgrim with name and passport of Ghazanfar Roknabadi has not been registered in the airport immigration system. It should be mentioned that as Iran's ambassador to Lebanon, Ghzanfar Roknabadi should have lots of information about Hezbollah, Jihad and some other Islamic radical groups in Lebanon and Syria. The death or missing of Ghazanfar Roknabadai alone, can point the finger at many external actors within the Middle East and beyond.
If these news are correct and some members of IRGC and Iran's former ambassador to Lebanon are among the victims and missing pilgrims of this event, Saudi Arabia, its close allies and possibly Israel should be prepared for imminent retaliation from Iran somewhere in the near future. Rouhani cutting UN trip short and cancelling some of his sideline meetings could be understood in this respect.
The Iran's retaliation would probably take place, when all the Iranian pilgrims and the bodies of victims will return back to the country. The retaliation could occur everywhere e.g. inside Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan,Yemen, or Bahrain. There are many battlefields to conduct such a retaliatory attack.
M. Sirani 28.09.2015
Following the recent incident in Mecca, some Iranian news agencies revealed that some members of IRGC are among the victims or missing Iranian pilgrims in this horrific event. The recent development revealed by Ya Libnan indicates a fact that Iran's former ambassador to Lebanon, Ghazanfar Roknabadi, is among the missing pilgrims as Iran's State TV declared. There is something interesting that according to Saudi Arabia authority an Iranian pilgrim with name and passport of Ghazanfar Roknabadi has not been registered in the airport immigration system. It should be mentioned that as Iran's ambassador to Lebanon, Ghzanfar Roknabadi should have lots of information about Hezbollah, Jihad and some other Islamic radical groups in Lebanon and Syria. The death or missing of Ghazanfar Roknabadai alone, can point the finger at many external actors within the Middle East and beyond.
If these news are correct and some members of IRGC and Iran's former ambassador to Lebanon are among the victims and missing pilgrims of this event, Saudi Arabia, its close allies and possibly Israel should be prepared for imminent retaliation from Iran somewhere in the near future. Rouhani cutting UN trip short and cancelling some of his sideline meetings could be understood in this respect.
The Iran's retaliation would probably take place, when all the Iranian pilgrims and the bodies of victims will return back to the country. The retaliation could occur everywhere e.g. inside Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan,Yemen, or Bahrain. There are many battlefields to conduct such a retaliatory attack.
M. Sirani 28.09.2015
Reference:
http://yalibnan.com/2015/09/27/ex-iranian-ambassor-to-lebanon-missing-after-hajj-stampede-in-saudi-arabia/
Sunday, September 27, 2015
Your Advisers Are the Luckiest People in the World, If They Are Still Working in Your Administrations; After Nearly 5 Years Total Confusion With Regards to the Syrian Civil War.
I don't want to shatter your dream. But you are still floating in the stage of confusion with regards to Syria; as i follow the new development. As it appears, you have eagerly decided to ruin your political reputation by your own hands.
M. Sirani 27.09.2015
M. Sirani 27.09.2015
US- Trained Syrian Rebels Handed Over Their Weapons and Equipment to Al-Nusra Front. (Thanks Guys For Delivery. I'm Wondering: Couldn't DHL Deliver Those Weapons & Equipment Faster And Cheaper Than $500 Million Dollars?).
Needless to explore more the scandal.
Note: You will become the great source of joke and comical entertainment for centuries to come. Your policy in this matter should get couple of Oscars.
M. Sirani 27.09.2015
Note: You will become the great source of joke and comical entertainment for centuries to come. Your policy in this matter should get couple of Oscars.
M. Sirani 27.09.2015
Wednesday, September 23, 2015
Tuesday, September 22, 2015
US-Trained Division 30 Rebels Betrayed US and Handed Weapons Over to Al-Nusra Front Immediately After Entering Syria.
Needless to explore this event. The only thing that i can say is that there is something seriously and fundamentally wrong over there from top to bottom. Spending $500 million dollars and achieving such a result???
M. Sirani 22.09.2015
Reference:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/11882195/US-trained-Division-30-rebels-betrayed-US-and-hand-weapons-over-to-al-Qaedas-affiliate-in-Syria.html
M. Sirani 22.09.2015
Reference:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/11882195/US-trained-Division-30-rebels-betrayed-US-and-hand-weapons-over-to-al-Qaedas-affiliate-in-Syria.html
Youth Anthem: Revolt (A Rap Lyrics)
Youth Anthem: Revolt (A Rap Lyrics)
Come on comrades
I can’t do it alone
Come on comrades
I can’t do it alone
Get up; join me
Come on; join me
***
Let’s start the game
Let’s start the fame
Let’s start riot
Let’s start revolt
Let’s conquer the world
***
Let's stop the fear
Let’s start the fight
Let’s start the fight
Let’s make everything right
Let’s change the world for good
Let’s share the wealth with poor
***
Let’s kick the ass of politicians
If don’t do their job
If they are corrupt
If they are cruel
If they are monarch
***
Let’s shut down the arm factories
Let’s produce the goods
Let’s publish the books
Let’s stop the war
Let’s start the peace
***
Let’s start the game
Let’s start the fame
Let’s start riot
Let’s start revolt
Let’s conquer the world
***
Let's stop the fear
Let’s start the fight
Let’s start the fight
Let’s make everything right
Let’s change the world for good
Let’s share the wealth with poor
***
Let’s kick the ass of false theories
Let’s burn them all
Let’s create new
Let’s develop new
Let’s innovate new
***
Let’s teach all the kids
How they should to think
How they should to fight
How they fight for rights
How they deny drugs
***
Let’s start the game
Let’s start the fame
Let’s start riot
Let’s start revolt
Let’s conquer the world
***
Let's stop the fear
Let’s start the fight
Let’s start the fight
Let’s make everything right
Let’s change the world for good
Let’s share the wealth with poor
***
Let’s protect the Earth
Let’s preserve resource
Let’s stop greed
Let’s stop drill
Let’s start clean
***
Let’s kick the ass of fascism
Let’s stop racism
Let’s stop fanaticism
Let’s be human being
Let’s be equal being
***
Let’s start the game
Let’s start the fame
Let’s start riot
Let’s start revolt
Let’s conquer the world
***
Let's stop the fear
Let’s start the fight
Let’s start the fight
Let’s make everything right
Let’s change the world for good
Let’s share the wealth with poor
***
Let’s give all the women
Equal rights to live
Equal rights in law
Equal rights in work
***
Let’s stop the child labor
Let’s respect the kids
Let’s respect the youth
Let's respect the law
***
Let’s enjoy the life
Let’s enjoy the rights
Let’s be morally right
Let’s be morally just
***
Let’s start the game
Let’s start the fame
Let’s start riot
Let’s start revolt
Let’s conquer the world
***
Let's stop the fear
Let’s start the fight
Let’s start the fight
Let’s make everything right
Let’s change the world for good
Let’s share the wealth with poor
***
M. Sirani 20.09.2015
© Mehran Sirani, 2015
All rights reserved. No part of this publication
may be used, reproduced, transmitted or stored in a retrieval system in any
form or by any means electronic, mechanical or otherwise, without the written
permission of copyright owner.
Thursday, September 17, 2015
After 4/5 Years Civil War, Only '4 or 5' US-Trained Syrian Rebels Fighting ISIS, As general Austin States. (Dear Super Power: Are You Kidding Me?).
Cry or laugh? I leave the answer to the readers and ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Note: The most sophisticated army equipped with the most advanced weapons without a clear strategy and tactic means: Nothing, Nothing, Nothing at all.
Dear Super Powers: No wonder large numbers of Non-State Actors are involving in the international politics. Part of the reason behind this new phenomenon in the international arena lies in the lack of effective and reliable strategy and tactic in your military departments and hard power. If i were you, i would completely & immediately retreat from both Iraq and Syria; because there is something seriously wrong in my hard power.
M. Sirani 17.09.2015
Note: The most sophisticated army equipped with the most advanced weapons without a clear strategy and tactic means: Nothing, Nothing, Nothing at all.
Dear Super Powers: No wonder large numbers of Non-State Actors are involving in the international politics. Part of the reason behind this new phenomenon in the international arena lies in the lack of effective and reliable strategy and tactic in your military departments and hard power. If i were you, i would completely & immediately retreat from both Iraq and Syria; because there is something seriously wrong in my hard power.
M. Sirani 17.09.2015
For Its Own Sake, The EU Should Play A More Effective Role With Regards to the Current Tensions in Syria and Iraq.
Briefly:
Due to the geographical location, the EU is the closest and easily reachable destination for the influx of refugees. As such, it would be wise for the EU to play a more effective role with regards to the current tensions in the Middle East; otherwise the Union will be the first location that would suffer a lot in different terms in the future.
M. Sirani 17.09.2015
Due to the geographical location, the EU is the closest and easily reachable destination for the influx of refugees. As such, it would be wise for the EU to play a more effective role with regards to the current tensions in the Middle East; otherwise the Union will be the first location that would suffer a lot in different terms in the future.
M. Sirani 17.09.2015
A Brief Notification for General Martin Dempsey and Kenneth Pollack.
Briefly:
According to newly revealed information, Russia has recently begun to build a new military base in Latakia in Syria. In this respect, Russian flights are using an air corridor over Iran and Iraq in order to transport the necessary equipment into Syria. This development indicates the fact that contrary to what General Martin Dempsey (The current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) and Kenneth Pollack (A distinguished Middle East expert in the Brookings Institute) in different occasions e.g. testimonies before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, repeatedly stated, the current Haidar Al-Abadi government is completely under the control of the Islamic Regime of Iran and cannot be trusted neither with regards to current civil war within Iraq nor in the war against ISIS in this country.
Reviewing this issue is a very important point due to the fact that although, the events of 1- the current civil war between various religious and ethnic groups within Iraq and 2- the war against ISIS in Iraq, are two separate issues; but they are totally related to each other. To put it simply, we cannot fundamentally defeat ISIS in Iraq, if we haven't be able to establish an inclusive political system in Iraq. In other words, as long as the political system in Iraq would be under the control and hegemony of a particular religious or ethnic group, some Islamic radical groups like ISIS and Al- Qaeda would re-rise and reestablish; simply because the fertile land and the necessary components exist. In short, your current policy with regards to ISIS will never work neither in Syria nor in Iraq based on many reasons including the brief details of this short note.
I have warned the western politicians in this matter through many short notes. Here below two of them will be re-uploaded again in a hope to refresh some memories.
M. Sirani 17.09.2015
Briefly:
There is no doubt that selling weapon to current Iraqi government would have a huge economical benefit for the U.S. economy. But, there are some serious considerations in this matter, which the combination of all of them indicate a fact that the current U.S. administration should response to Al-Abadi's request in a very cautious and careful manner. In short, based on some reasons including:
1- The current Iraqi political system is the puppet of the Islamic Regime of Iran.
2- The current Iraqi political system is not an inclusive government.
3- Some Ministers within current Iraqi political system are the high ranking members of Badr Organization, which is a subset organization of Iran's IRGS and Quds Force. (Those, who are interested to know more about the three issues mentioned above, can read my short note entitled "You are shocking me General Dempsey" in the following link).
Link: http://irancare.blogspot.no/2015/01/honestly-you-are-shocking-me-general.html
4-- Unlimited increasing influence of IRGC and its numerous subsets Shiite Groups in Iraq.
5- Serious violation of the human rights and atrocities against Sunni people performed by various Shiite groups.
6- The ongoing civil war in Yemen and the important role of Iran in this country.
7- And the uncertainty about the final outcome of a nuclear deal with Iran.
The current U.S. administration should evaluate Al-Abadi's request in a very cautious and careful manner. Because, there is some possibility that some of these weapons would fall in the hands of IRGC and Quds Forces and will be used against U.S. forces somewhere in the future; exactly the same as those high-tech weapons that were ended up in the hands of Al-Qaeda and Taliban and later were used against U.S. and its allies in Afghanistan. Should we learn something from history or not?
M. Sirani 14.04.2015
You Are Shocking Me General Dempsey.
In an interview which took place Thursday, when the reporter asked General Martin Dempsey about Iran's military operation in Iraq, the Joint Chiefs Chairman responded:
"So far, those operations haven't threatened U.S. troops or their mission" (Yahoo, 2015).
This statement is honestly shocking me. One might wonder why? This is the story. Everybody knows that the Iranian Regime has completely colonized Iraq since many years ago at least since December 2011, when the U.S. withdrew its troops from Iraq. Since 2013, ISIS has systematically begun to seize the power in Iraq and Syria. To put it simply, ISIS activities in both Iraq and Syria are threatening Iran's interests (in different terms) in both countries. Since August 2014, the USA has formed a coalition (nearly 60 countries as Mr. John Kerry says) and has begun to fight ISIS in Iraq and Syria. I'm wondering: why should the Iranian Regime complain? Why should the Iranian Regime perform any activity against the U.S. troops, when the U.S. troops are fighting ISIS and doing a great favor for the Iranian Regime free of any charge?
Not only Iran but also the Syrian regime are using Buck Passing Strategy and enjoying all the activities that the USA and its coalition are doing against ISIS in both Iraq and Syria. What else should the Iranian Regime or Assad's Regime wish in this matter General Dempsey?
This is not the end of the story. General Dempsey surprises us with another shocking statement. In this interview, General Dempsey is identifying the Iranian influence in Iraq a positive move, if the Iraqi government remains committed to inclusivity of all different groups inside Iraq. His direct statement is as follows:
"If it is a path that ties the two countries more closely together economically or even politically, as long at the Iraqi government remains committed to inclusivity of all the various groups inside the country, then I think Iranian influence will be positive" (Yahoo, 2015).
This part of General Dempsey's statement is interesting and at the same time shocking from different angles. I'm wondering, do i have to remind the Joint Chiefs of Chairman about the destructive role of the Iranian Regime in Iraq, which directly and indirectly facilitated the best environment for the emergence and presence of ISIS in both Iraq and Syria? Do i have to remind General Dempsey that hegemonic influence of the Shiite regime of Iran led most of the Sunni tribes in Iraq to join ISIS? Or do i have to remind General Dempsey that since 2003 onward, most of the U.S. troops in Iraq were killed by the IRGC, Quds forces and their affiliates such as Mahdi Army or Badr force?
Furthermore, General Dempsey has used the term "inclusivity" as a characteristic of the current Iraqi government, in order to underpin his statement about the positive role of the Iranian Regime in Iraq. I don't want to deeply analyze this part of General Dempsey's statement; although there are many loopholes in this matter as well. But with help of some simple questions, i would try to illustrate my argument.
Dear General Dempsey:
1- Who is the current Iraqi Minister of Transportation? Is Hadi Al- Amiri the current minister or not? Is Hadi Al-Amiri the head of Badr Organization or not? Is the Badr Organization a subset of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) or not?
2- Who is the current Iraqi Interior Minister? Is Mohammed Ghabban a Shiite politician affiliated to the Badr Organization or not? Needless to say that Interior Ministry is a key security ministry within every political system including current Iraqi government.
3- Who is the current Iraqi Human Rights Minister? Is Mohammed Shia' al-Sudani a Shiite politician affiliated to the Badr Organization or not?
Dear General Dempsey, the Joint Chiefs of Chairman of the strongest country in the world: With just these simple examples, could we identify the current Iraqi government an inclusive political system and furthermore could we identify the overall influence of Iran in Iraq a positive move? Or should we be optimistic about the inclusivity of Iraqi government somewhere in the future?
In sum, i can offer you many other examples and a more deeper academic argument, which the combination of all of them indicates a simple fact that:
The current Iraqi government is not inclusive and never will be a inclusive political system as long as the Islamic Regime governs in Iran.
Note: If you think you can stop Iran's adventurous nuclear activity by handing over Iraq to Iran, you are absolutely and completely in the wrong direction. You will understand my statement, when it's too late. Remember my short note in this matter.
M. Sirani 09.01.2015
Reference:
http://news.yahoo.com/dempsey-us-eyes-ways-aid-iraq-forces-182531294--politics.html
According to newly revealed information, Russia has recently begun to build a new military base in Latakia in Syria. In this respect, Russian flights are using an air corridor over Iran and Iraq in order to transport the necessary equipment into Syria. This development indicates the fact that contrary to what General Martin Dempsey (The current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) and Kenneth Pollack (A distinguished Middle East expert in the Brookings Institute) in different occasions e.g. testimonies before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, repeatedly stated, the current Haidar Al-Abadi government is completely under the control of the Islamic Regime of Iran and cannot be trusted neither with regards to current civil war within Iraq nor in the war against ISIS in this country.
Reviewing this issue is a very important point due to the fact that although, the events of 1- the current civil war between various religious and ethnic groups within Iraq and 2- the war against ISIS in Iraq, are two separate issues; but they are totally related to each other. To put it simply, we cannot fundamentally defeat ISIS in Iraq, if we haven't be able to establish an inclusive political system in Iraq. In other words, as long as the political system in Iraq would be under the control and hegemony of a particular religious or ethnic group, some Islamic radical groups like ISIS and Al- Qaeda would re-rise and reestablish; simply because the fertile land and the necessary components exist. In short, your current policy with regards to ISIS will never work neither in Syria nor in Iraq based on many reasons including the brief details of this short note.
I have warned the western politicians in this matter through many short notes. Here below two of them will be re-uploaded again in a hope to refresh some memories.
M. Sirani 17.09.2015
1- Iraqi Prime Minister Haidar Al-Abadi Asked U.S. For Weapon.
Briefly:
There is no doubt that selling weapon to current Iraqi government would have a huge economical benefit for the U.S. economy. But, there are some serious considerations in this matter, which the combination of all of them indicate a fact that the current U.S. administration should response to Al-Abadi's request in a very cautious and careful manner. In short, based on some reasons including:
1- The current Iraqi political system is the puppet of the Islamic Regime of Iran.
2- The current Iraqi political system is not an inclusive government.
3- Some Ministers within current Iraqi political system are the high ranking members of Badr Organization, which is a subset organization of Iran's IRGS and Quds Force. (Those, who are interested to know more about the three issues mentioned above, can read my short note entitled "You are shocking me General Dempsey" in the following link).
Link: http://irancare.blogspot.no/2015/01/honestly-you-are-shocking-me-general.html
4-- Unlimited increasing influence of IRGC and its numerous subsets Shiite Groups in Iraq.
5- Serious violation of the human rights and atrocities against Sunni people performed by various Shiite groups.
6- The ongoing civil war in Yemen and the important role of Iran in this country.
7- And the uncertainty about the final outcome of a nuclear deal with Iran.
The current U.S. administration should evaluate Al-Abadi's request in a very cautious and careful manner. Because, there is some possibility that some of these weapons would fall in the hands of IRGC and Quds Forces and will be used against U.S. forces somewhere in the future; exactly the same as those high-tech weapons that were ended up in the hands of Al-Qaeda and Taliban and later were used against U.S. and its allies in Afghanistan. Should we learn something from history or not?
M. Sirani 14.04.2015
2- You Are Shocking Me general Dempsey.
You Are Shocking Me General Dempsey.
In an interview which took place Thursday, when the reporter asked General Martin Dempsey about Iran's military operation in Iraq, the Joint Chiefs Chairman responded:
"So far, those operations haven't threatened U.S. troops or their mission" (Yahoo, 2015).
This statement is honestly shocking me. One might wonder why? This is the story. Everybody knows that the Iranian Regime has completely colonized Iraq since many years ago at least since December 2011, when the U.S. withdrew its troops from Iraq. Since 2013, ISIS has systematically begun to seize the power in Iraq and Syria. To put it simply, ISIS activities in both Iraq and Syria are threatening Iran's interests (in different terms) in both countries. Since August 2014, the USA has formed a coalition (nearly 60 countries as Mr. John Kerry says) and has begun to fight ISIS in Iraq and Syria. I'm wondering: why should the Iranian Regime complain? Why should the Iranian Regime perform any activity against the U.S. troops, when the U.S. troops are fighting ISIS and doing a great favor for the Iranian Regime free of any charge?
Not only Iran but also the Syrian regime are using Buck Passing Strategy and enjoying all the activities that the USA and its coalition are doing against ISIS in both Iraq and Syria. What else should the Iranian Regime or Assad's Regime wish in this matter General Dempsey?
This is not the end of the story. General Dempsey surprises us with another shocking statement. In this interview, General Dempsey is identifying the Iranian influence in Iraq a positive move, if the Iraqi government remains committed to inclusivity of all different groups inside Iraq. His direct statement is as follows:
"If it is a path that ties the two countries more closely together economically or even politically, as long at the Iraqi government remains committed to inclusivity of all the various groups inside the country, then I think Iranian influence will be positive" (Yahoo, 2015).
This part of General Dempsey's statement is interesting and at the same time shocking from different angles. I'm wondering, do i have to remind the Joint Chiefs of Chairman about the destructive role of the Iranian Regime in Iraq, which directly and indirectly facilitated the best environment for the emergence and presence of ISIS in both Iraq and Syria? Do i have to remind General Dempsey that hegemonic influence of the Shiite regime of Iran led most of the Sunni tribes in Iraq to join ISIS? Or do i have to remind General Dempsey that since 2003 onward, most of the U.S. troops in Iraq were killed by the IRGC, Quds forces and their affiliates such as Mahdi Army or Badr force?
Furthermore, General Dempsey has used the term "inclusivity" as a characteristic of the current Iraqi government, in order to underpin his statement about the positive role of the Iranian Regime in Iraq. I don't want to deeply analyze this part of General Dempsey's statement; although there are many loopholes in this matter as well. But with help of some simple questions, i would try to illustrate my argument.
Dear General Dempsey:
1- Who is the current Iraqi Minister of Transportation? Is Hadi Al- Amiri the current minister or not? Is Hadi Al-Amiri the head of Badr Organization or not? Is the Badr Organization a subset of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) or not?
2- Who is the current Iraqi Interior Minister? Is Mohammed Ghabban a Shiite politician affiliated to the Badr Organization or not? Needless to say that Interior Ministry is a key security ministry within every political system including current Iraqi government.
3- Who is the current Iraqi Human Rights Minister? Is Mohammed Shia' al-Sudani a Shiite politician affiliated to the Badr Organization or not?
Dear General Dempsey, the Joint Chiefs of Chairman of the strongest country in the world: With just these simple examples, could we identify the current Iraqi government an inclusive political system and furthermore could we identify the overall influence of Iran in Iraq a positive move? Or should we be optimistic about the inclusivity of Iraqi government somewhere in the future?
In sum, i can offer you many other examples and a more deeper academic argument, which the combination of all of them indicates a simple fact that:
The current Iraqi government is not inclusive and never will be a inclusive political system as long as the Islamic Regime governs in Iran.
Note: If you think you can stop Iran's adventurous nuclear activity by handing over Iraq to Iran, you are absolutely and completely in the wrong direction. You will understand my statement, when it's too late. Remember my short note in this matter.
M. Sirani 09.01.2015
Reference:
http://news.yahoo.com/dempsey-us-eyes-ways-aid-iraq-forces-182531294--politics.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)