‘The US has lost the war in Syria and is now in bed with terrorists!’ : The Saker


September 28, 2017. Here is the original and full transcript of my recent interview with Sputnik (by email). Due to the decision by the Sputnik editors to remove parts of my replies which I consider to be essential, I have taken the painful decision not to grant any further interviews to Sputnik. — The Saker


“It is hard to talk with people who confuse Austria and Australia”. — Vladimir Putin
(See Putin has openly mocked the United States)

Sputnik: Could you comment on the US recent actions in Deir ez-Zor? What could have been behind the alleged US provocations in the region?

The Saker: The US has lost the war in Syria. The good and the bad terrorists are in full retreat, Assad is firmly in power and nobody believes anymore that he can be removed. The Israelis are in a total panic mode. The Saudis are enraged. And the Russian peace initiative is backed by all the actors who truly matter: the Syrians themselves, of course, but also Iran and Turkey.  Even Hezbollah has declared victory. This is a massive loss of face for the Empire and a humiliation for the USA.

As a result, the Americans are falling back to their plan B – that is, to partition Syria, and keep control of at least some areas in the northeast of the country in order to keep US military forces (illegally) present in Syria, keep control of the oil fields east of the Euphrates river and continue to destabilize and subvert the liberated regions of Syria.

The Americans hope to achieve that by using the Syrian Kurds as their boots on the ground.  The problem with that plan is that with the help of the Russians, the Syrians have freed the city of Deir-ez-Zor and that their forces have now crossed the Euphrates river.  Now it is the American plan B which looks increasingly threatened.  This is why the Americans are engaging in terrorist attacks against Russian military personnel.

Sputnik: What are the US’ major objectives in Syria and what could Russia expect from the US-led coalition in the near future? Did the US State Department really abandon the idea to topple Bashar al Assad?

The Saker: The US-lead coalition is composed of three entities: the US armed forces, the good terrorists and the bad terrorists.  The rest of that ‘coalition’ is entirely theoretical.  This means that all that the Russians can expect from such a ‘coalition’ are more terrorist attacks, more provocations.

The US State Department can abandon the idea to topple Bashar al Assad or not, this will make exactly zero difference on the ground.

Secretary Tillerson has proven himself a weak man, unable to even contain Nikki Haley at the UN, never mind taking any effective actions against the Neocons and their allies in the US deep state.  The latter are now back in total control of the USA.

These people have a single operating mode: war, war and more war.

As for a sudden outbreak of peace, that is their worst nightmare.

The Russians fully understand that and this is why they work with everybody else in the region, even crazy states like Israel or Saudi Arabia.  At least those two are capable of making a deal and sticking to it. In contrast, the USA are what the Russians called “non-agreement capable” (недоговороспособны).

This is why even Putin said that it is “hard to talk with people who confuse Austria and Australia”.

Sputnik: Is it possible that Daesh struck some sort of a deal with the US in order to save the lives of terrorists and preserve their positions in Syria?

The Saker: Of course!  Daesh and all the other terrorist groups are working hand in glove with the United States.  The recent satellite photos published by the Russians prove that: they are all working together and they have been doing this for years.

Sputnik: Is it possible that Washington is considering Daesh and Al-Qaeda’s affiliate al-Nusra Front as an effective bulwark against the Assad regime?

The Saker: Not anymore.  That was their original plan, but now that all the terrorists, good and bad, have been either defeated or have switched sides and are part of the Russian peace plan, the last American hope is for the Kurds.  Of course, the Americans will still be working with Daesh, al-Qaeda, al-Nusra, ISIS and all of the other labels the various Takfiri groups use, but by now they know that it is over and that they will not topple the Syrian government or even conquer most of Syria.

Sputnik: If there is cooperation between US military personnel and Daesh, was it authorized by Washington or has the Pentagon/CIA taken the liberty to collude with terrorists in order to achieve America’s objectives (oust Assad, split Syria up) using all means possible?

The Saker: I don’t have access to secret US negotiations transcripts, but it is an easy guess to make that the CIA and the Pentagon have been working with Takfiri terrorist groups as far back as the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. This has then continued in Bosnia, Chechnia, Kosovo, and, of course, on 9/11 when Takfiri terrorists have been used as patsies to sit in the planes which were slammed in the Twin Towers before they, along with World Trade Center 7, have been brought down by controlled demolition.

You have to understand a simple but crucial fact: Takfiri terrorists are the foot soldiers of the Empire. They are the creation of the US and the US has always tried to control them, more or less successfully.

Sputnik: Could Moscow continue its cooperation (intelligence sharing and etc.) with Washington on Syria given the US controversial actions in the region? Will the US continue efforts to disrupt the Syrian Arab Army’s advance in Deir ez-Zor, Idlib, northern Syria? And what should Russia do to avoid possible US traps?

The Saker: Moscow should continue to engage in deconfliction efforts with the USA, just because there might be mentally sane US officers in Syria who would want to avoid a potentially very dangerous incident between US and Russian forces.  But the real solution is to begin to demand a full withdrawal of all US forces from Syria as they are they totally illegally.

The Russians should also accept as a fact that the US will continue to break agreements, refuse to abide by the terms of any negotiated deal, and continue to support all the terrorist forces in Syria and the rest of the region.

The United States are simply unable to collaborate in any meaningful way.  All they can do is sabotage any and all peace efforts and subvert the Syrian government.  This is very sad, but this is also a fact of life.

Instead, what the Russians should do is give their fullest support to the Syrian, Iranian and Hezbollah forces on the ground until they finally liberate Syria from all the terrorist forces, including the Americans.  


If you are interested, you can find what Sputnik actually posted here

'Israeli flags won’t save you': Erdogan threatens Iraqi Kurds with famine over referendum



Why Invasion of Iraqi Kurdistan May Result in Collapse of Mid-East

Ekaterina Blinova

Sputnik: The Iraqi Kurdish issue should be solved only through diplomatic means, Israeli political analyst Avigdor Eskin told Sputnik. According to Eskin, one should take into account both the political and economic interests of regional and global players in the region, as well as the unstoppable Kurdish enthusiasm to gain independence.

In case Middle Eastern powers take a military option against Iraqi Kurdistan, blood will flow and a process of self-destruction by most of the region’s states will become inevitable, Israeli political analyst and commentator Avigdor Eskin told Sputnik, commenting on the results of the Kurdish independence vote.

On Wednesday, Iraqi Kurdistan’s High Elections and Referendum Commission announced that more than 92.73 percent of more than 3 million voters said “yes” to the region’s separation from Baghdad.

The Kurdish referendum has triggered protest from the governments of Iraq, Iran and Turkey. The three have signaled that they are ready to consider a wide range of options to tackle the Kurdish secessionism.

What’s Behind Iran, Turkey and Iraq’s Opposition to Kurdish Independence?

According to the political analyst, the states’ motivation is understandable: “While Iraq is losing a part of its territory, Turkey and Iran as well as Syria have every reason to fear that their Kurdish population would try to join their jubilant brethren in Iraqi Kurdistan.”

He highlighted that “Turkey is already suffering from an internal armed struggle with the Kurds.”

“The situation in Iran is less dramatic,” Eskin continued. “However, some fights with radical elements within the ethnic minority are taking place in the Kurdish region of Iran.”

And of course, one shouldn’t forget about the Syrian Kurds’ incentives to gain independence from Damascus, he noted.

“However, this does not mean that the war is the only option,” the Israeli analyst stressed.

For instance, Ankara threatened to undermine Iraqi Kurdistan’s energy business by “clamping” its main “oil artery” — the Kirkuk-Ceyhan pipeline.According to the Kurdish media outlet Rudaw, the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) started exporting oil to the Turkish Mediterranean export terminal of Ceyhan in May of 2014 after Baghdad “froze payments to Erbil from the national budget as pressure and punishment for trying to go ahead with the oil sales.”

Still, according to Eskin, it is unlikely that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan will deliver on his promise to impose an embargo on the Kurds given the substantial investments Ankara and other powerful players had made in the region.

Why Oil Embargo on Iraqi Kurdistan is Highly Unlikely

As The Financial Times reported on September 21, Ankara has “helped build the KRG’s infrastructure, including constructing a $550m airport in Erbil,” with about 1,300 Turkish companies having business ties with the autonomous region.

One should also keep in mind that in June 2017 the KRG signed a 20-year-long deal with Russia’s Rosneft to cooperate on the exploration and production of hydrocarbons.

In accordance with the agreement, the Russian company “will get access to the major regional transportation system with the throughput capacity of 700,000 barrels per day (bpd)” with the prospect of expanding the existing pipeline up to “1 million bpd by the end of 2017.”

Furthermore, Rosneft and Iraqi Kurdistan are planning to launch a pipeline to export gas to Turkey and Europe by 2019.

Besides Rosneft, Russia’s Gazprom Neft company is currently engaged in three oil projects in the region.

The other two players interested in the uninterrupted flow of oil from Iraqi Kurdistan are the US’ ExxonMobil and France’s Total.

Iraqi Kurdistan has an estimated 45 billion barrels of oil reserves and 5.66 trillion meters of natural gas, according to the KRG’s Ministry of Natural Resources.

“We can guess that Rosneft, for example, would not have signed the contract for $4 billion if there were no certain assurances from the Turkish side. The same is in the case of major Western companies,” Eskin underscored, adding that Ankara’s threats were largely directed toward “rebellious Kurds.”

Why Israel Won’t Abandon Iraqi Kurdistan

The Israeli analyst drew attention to the longstanding alliance between Erdogan and Barzani.

“The Kurds in Iraq and their folks in Turkey are deeply divided,” Eskin said. “While the Barzani family leans more towards the West and towards Israel the secular Kurdish Workers’ Party (PKK) was rather ‘Marxist’ in Western terms.”

The analyst underscored that Israel has supported Iraqi Kurdistan since the early 1960s and it “will not abandon friends after 50 years of alliance.””Israel was the first country to assist the Kurds when ISIS [Daesh] started their extermination,” Eskin highlighted. “Israel always tried to develop friendship with other minority groups such as Kurds, Christians and Persians (before 1978).”

The current progress in relations with the Arabs will not alter Israel’s stance toward the Kurdish struggle for independence, he noted.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly voiced his endorsement of the Iraqi Kurds’ pursuit of sovereignty.

US, European Powers Not Interested in Splitting Iraq Up’

Eskin doesn’t agree with those who believe that the West is interested in splitting Iraq up: According to the Israeli political analyst, the US and its European NATO allies “want to see in Iraq a balance between different religious and ethnic groups rather than any kind of partitions.”

“Americans especially invested a lot of efforts and money in post-Saddam Iraq and they do not want to admit the failure of their foreign policy,” Eskin explained. “Britain and France do not want to admit that their map drawing [the 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement] for the Middle East was a gross mistake. And nobody in Washington wants to get a reminder from the Kurds that their invasion in Iraq was a total failure.”

Therefore, on September 21 the UN Security Council members almost unanimously warned about “the potentially destabilizing impact” of the Kurdish referendum and “expressed their continuing respect for the sovereignty, territorial integrity and unity of Iraq.”

Mutually Acceptable Compromise is the Only Way Out

However, the reality on the ground now dictates its own rules. While a military solution would obviously deal a heavy blow not only to the Middle Eastern region, but also to the geopolitical and economic interests of global players, the only way out is a mutually acceptable compromise and non-violent concessions, the analyst suggested.

Eskin emphasized “the great wave of enthusiasm among the Kurds” adding that those who predicted that the plebiscite would be used as just a bargaining chip between the KRG and Baghdad had obviously misread the situation.

According to Eskin, “the compromise is obvious: [Iraqi] Kurdistan will not encourage the Kurds in Turkey and Iran to rebel and in exchange — no military pressure and no sanctions [will be imposed on it].”On the other hand, however, Baghdad risks losing both oil revenues and face in case Iraqi Kurdistan secedes.

Therefore, “there is an urgent need for cooperation between Russia and the US [on the issue],” the analyst believes.

While Washington still has influence on decision-makers in Iraq, Moscow has recently emerged as a powerful negotiator and broker in the Middle Eastern region. According to the analyst, the two may potentially help solve the Baghdad-Kurdish dilemma.

Meanwhile, the Russian Foreign Ministry emphasized “the need to avoid anything that could further complicate and destabilize the already conflict-ridden Middle Eastern region,” while commenting on the Kurdish independence vote.

Moscow underscored that it “maintains… unwavering commitment to the sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity of the friendly Iraq and other Middle Eastern states.” On the other hand, the ministry stressed that it “respects the national aspirations of the Kurds.”

It pointed out that “all disputes… between the Iraqi federal government and the government of the Kurdish Autonomous Region… should be resolved through constructive and respectful dialogue with a view to devising a mutually acceptable formula of coexistence within a single Iraqi state.”

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position of Sputnik.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.