Can a World War Still Be Avoided?
- Can a World War Still Be Avoided?
by http://www.voltairenet.org/en , 7 Oct 2016
Events around the Syrian crisis are accelerating, and reveal the depth of the conflict between the Atlantist camp and the Russo-Chinese block. After having observed the growing risk of a generalised war – conventional or even nuclear – Thierry Meyssan analyses the manœuvres of the United States and Russia’s responses to them.
by Thierry Meyssan
After the destruction of the pride of the Emirati Navy on 1 October, the armies of the Gulf petro-dictatorships are hesitating to continue the war with the Syrian Arab Republic on their own. It is clear to everyone that the ground-sea missile which destroyed the wave-piercing catamaran is an extremely sophisticated weapon, the like of which has never yet been seen on any battlefield. It was not fired by the Houthis, nor by the partisans of ex-President Saleh, who do not possess weapons of this order, but by Russia, which has been secretly present in Yemen since the summer.
The idea of a coordination of jihadists with their local allies alone, without the intervention of the United States, is all the more difficult to imagine since the rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Qatar has consistently sabotaged the previous stages of the war.
Washington is therefore seriously considering the only remaining option – direct military confrontation.
The United States have solicited the 64 States and the 3 international institutions which have joined their so-called anti-Daesh Coalition in order to launch an attack against Damascus. In practise, only Canada, France, Holland and the United Kingdom are present. The idea is to fire cruise missiles on Damascus and Lattakia, and to bomb the Syrian Arab Army. This project was announced to members of NATO during the Atlantic Council of 27 September. It was supported by Senator John McCain in the Wall Street Journal.
This operation implies the reorganisation of the on-going preparations for the liberation of Mosul in Iraq, currently occupied par Daesh. Everyone already knows that the real objective of this Coalition is not as announced, but is directed at changing the occupant in Mosul. It is not aimed at putting genuine Iraqi representatives in power, nor its historical inhabitants, but only Sunni Iraqis, in order to create a «Sunnistan». The Coalition has not bombed Daesh, but did not hesitate to annihilate – «by accident» – a militia composed of Shia volunteers who had come, unlike the Coalition, to deliver the city from obscurantism. President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan gave the game away by declaring to the newspaper Sabah that once Mosul was liberated, the city would belong to its inhabitants, «… and only Sunni Arabs, Turkmen and Sunni Kurds can stay». In other words, the Coalition proposes to finish the job that Washington had handed to Daesh. Its true objective is to endorse the ethnic cleansing practised by the jihadists, notably the expulsion or the massacre of Christians and Yazidi Kurds, in order to create a religiously homogeneous state. Just as we have already announced several times, Daesh will have to migrate from Mosul to al-Raqqa and Deir ez-Zor, the same way that they evacuated Jarabulus faced with the Turkish army, without putting up a fight.
Reacting to the project for the bombing of the Syrian Arab Republic, Russia revealed the installation in Syria of air defence batteries supplied with S-300 and S-400 missiles. According to Russian experts, these weapons are not only capable of destroying any aircraft in flight, including stealth aircraft, but also cruise missiles. Since this situation has never occurred on the battle-field, nobody knows whether or not the statement is true. But over the centuries, the Russians have never lied about the performance of their weaponry.