Following the ”Arabic spring” we saw the ISIS terror organization grow out of it. It is very hard to keep track on the events in Syria because of the many belligerent participators. The protagonists in the Syrian drama are mainly Israel, the United States, Iran, Russia, Turkey, ISIS, the Syrian forces and later on a couple of rebell groups, all of them with their own agenda. Massive smokescreens have been layed in a fog of war by the participators in order to conceal their true intentions or even their own participation in this war and how.
Turkey’s President Erdogan apologized in a letter to President Putin in June 2016 for the downing of a Russian fighter plane somewhere near the border between Turkey and Syria in November 2015. The pilot was killed, according to Putin’s press spokesman. Exactly on which side of the border the fighter Aircraft was shot down is contested.
The letter opened up for a thawing in the icey relations between the two countries. Putin initiated economic sanctions after the downing of the Russian airplane, and he also ended the Russian’s extensive travelling trips to Turkey. Millions of Russian tourists visited Turkey every year. For a while, it was debated whether there would come a military clash.
Prior to the downing of the airplane, Russia and Turkey had good relations, both in the economic and the political spheres. It was obvious that for Moscow, as well as for Ankara, it would have become too expensive to continue with hostility. The Russian energy giant Gazprom immidiately declared that it was now ready to re-negotiate the construction of a large gas pipeline to Turkey, following the Turkish apology.
What was still unclear was what effect this approach would have on the war in Syria, where Russia and Turkey actively supported different sides of the fighting.
Russia could probably have predicted the ”Arab Spring” because of the signs of what was the growing size of general Ghadaffi’s ego which was already before notably large. With a shiny drawn sword and shining armor, the peace prize winner Obama went into action on his chivalrously and loyal steed. Finally, a new world would be created through the domino effect.
The US administration, possibly Obama personally, named the Arabic spring early in the operation or even before it was executed. North Africa and the Middle East would develop into a thriving region with associated economic development, peace, security and freedom. Possibly the issue of Israel would also be resolved and Iran be held back.
But above all, the threat from the Libyan-African Gold stamp currency would be cleared away. Ghadaffi believed that the West would voluntarily pay for oil with gold. He was so greedy that he did not even understand that gold is only available in a very limited amount. He must be taken out of the game. The military operation was led by France and the United Kingdom.
Yet another world than the intended was created. And then our brave knight went on doing the mistake to allow ISIS to grow strong. Not because Obama was evil, but because he wanted to oppose Iran and counter Russia’s and Iran’s converging plans to overthrow Israel, etc. Syria was the chessboard. Europe became the loser in this game, but in the long run I think it will be the US who lose influence.
Russia could claim that the United States of America did nothing and even supplied ISIS with weapons. But they didn’t mention the fact that Russia together with Iran plotted to destroy Israel and whip up a massive refugee wave to Europe in order to weaken the to Russia and Iran antagonizing West European regimes. The destroying of Israel didn’t succeed, but the latter went way over expectations.
Am I right to point out the relationship between Russia and Turkey first, and not bother about the other players interactions cause they have a predictable pattern in their actions? I was thinking that the Russian-Turkish relationship was the only truly volatile relationship that could go either way. But then again the US armed the ISIS terrorists so that they (hopefully) as good Sunni-Muslims would fight the Shia-Muslim Iranians.
Can you come up with a better explanation for the supposedly arming of the ISIS by the US? Is the ISIS allowed to continue to exist so that they can pose a threat to the Iranian forces in Syria?
Roger M. Klang, defense political spokesman for the Christian Values Party (Kristna Värdepartiet) in Sweden