russiainsider--2020-03-04--Macron Should Offer Asylum to Assange - He Has Everything to Gain from Doing So, and Little to Lose

By offering asylum to the persecuted publisher of WikiLeaks , France ’ s Macron would enhance his status in myriad European latitudes and all across the Global South , writes Pepe Escobar .
It ’ s quite fitting that the – imperially pre-determined – judicial fate of Julian Assange is being played out in Britain , the home of George Orwell .
As chronicled by the painful , searing reports of Ambassador Craig Murray , what ’ s taking place in Woolwich Crown Court is a sub-Orwellian farce with Conradian overtones : the horror…the horror… , remixed for the Raging @ @ @ @ @ @ @ darkness is not in the Congo : it ’ s in a dingy courtroom attached to a prison , presided by a lowly imperial lackey .
In one of Michel Onfray ’ s books published last year , “ Theorie de la Dictature ” ( Robert Laffont ) – the top dissident , politically incorrect French philosopher starts exactly from Orwell to examine the key features of a new-look dictatorship .
He tracks seven paths of destruction : to destroy freedom , impoverish language , abolish truth , suppress history , deny nature @ @ @ @ @ @ @ empire .
To destroy freedom , Onfray stresses , power needs to assure perpetual surveillance ; ruin personal life ; suppress solitude ; make opinion uniform and denounce thought crimes .
That sounds like the road map for the United States government ’ s persecution of Assange .
Other paths , as in impoverishing language , include practicing newspeak ; using double language ; destroying words ; oralizing language ; speaking a single language ; and suppressing the classics .
That sounds like the modus operandi of the ruling classes in the Hegemon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ teach ideology ; instrumentalize the press ; propagate fake news ; and produce reality .
To propagate hate , power , among other instruments , must create an enemy ; foment wars ; and psychiatrize critical thinking .
There ’ s no question we are already mired deep inside this neo-Orwellian dystopia .
John “ Paradise Lost ” Milton , in 1642 , could not have been more prophetic , when he wrote “ Those that hurt the eyes of the people blame them for being blind.
” How not to identify a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Macron ’ s army , month after month , willfully blinding protesting Gilets Jaunes/Yellow Vests in the streets of France .
Orwell was more straightforward than Milton , saying that to talk about freedom is meaningless unless it refers to the freedom to tell people what they don ’ t want to hear .
And he put it in context by quoting a line from Milton : “ By the known rules of ancient liberty.
” No “ known rules of ancient liberty ” are allowed to penetrate the heart of darkness of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Service of the People Juan Branco is arguably the most brilliant young French intellectual – heir to a fine Sartre/Foucault/Deleuze tradition .
The French establishment detests him , especially because of his best-seller “ Crepuscule , ” where he dissected Macronism – branded as a thuggish regime – from the inside , and the French president as a creature and instrument of a tiny oligarchy .
He has just published “ Assange : L ’ Antisouverain ” ( Les Editions du Cerf ) , an absorbing , erudite study that he defines @ @ @ @ @ @ @ figure of the Anti-Sovereign.
” The Sovereign is of course the state apparatus .
Here ( in French ) is an excellent interview with Branco about the book .
There ’ s nothing even remotely comparable to it in the Anglosphere , which has treated Assange essentially as an unpleasant freak , oozing pedestrian slander and piling up sub-ideology tirades disguised as facts .
The book is essentially structured as a seminary for the hyper-selective Ecole Normale Superieure , the august school in the Latin Quarter here that shapes French elites , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of privileges .
Branco takes the reader to the heart of this universe just to make him or her discover Assange from the point of view of one of those students .
Branco was privileged to profit from the interaction between the Ecole Normale Superieure and Yale .
He met Assange at the Ecuadorian embassy in January 2014 , “ in a state of radical confinement , ” and then followed him as a juridical consultant , then lawyer , “ day after day , ” until meeting him again in September 2016 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than change the course of the American presidential election and engineer the fall of the one who had sworn to crush him , one Hillary Rodham Clinton.
” Branco is fascinated by Assange ’ s “ scientific journalism , ” and his capacity to “ intervene in the political space without occupying a determined place.
” Assange is painted as a contemporary oracle , a maniac for free access to information , someone who “ never looked for a reward , or insertion , or juridical protection , ” which is a totally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Branco shows how WikiLeaks “ allowed whistleblowers to act , ” by growing an archive parallel to the “ production of data related to the mechanism of contemporary power apparatuses.
” Under this framework “ every citizen is able to become a researcher.
” So , Assange ’ s work has been about redistributing power .
It ’ s as if Assange had become a “ spy at the service of the people.
” And that leads Branco to draw the connection with the Gilets Jaunes/Yellow Vests .
WikiLeaks releasing the “ Macron @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Vest struggle for direct democracy .
Branco describes Assange as “ a strange figure , a bridge between the pre-history of digital civilization and its definitive penetration as a primordial , structural element of political and social space.
” But arguably his best appraisal is of Assange as “ a dissident of his own internal space , mostly interested by the sphere of cultural , economic and social domination in which he was born , that of the American imperium , of which his native Australia is one of the most dedicated allies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he constituted himself as a political actor.
” In what could be construed as the top reason for the United States government ’ s unbounded thirst for vengeance against Assange , he challenged the fact that “ American acts have a natural regulatory function for the rest of the world , a result of their over-dominance of the contemporary geopolitical space.
” It ’ s All in the Algorithm And that brings us to the heart of the matter : algorithms .
As Branco synthesizes it , the “ revelation of raw documents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those that have been discarded because of their submission to a word of authority whose algorithms have been masked.
” Onfray had already warned about “ destroying words , ” “ impoverishing language ” and clinging to newspeak – but Branco takes it to a new level .
Because “ the word of power is a word assimilated to the algorithm , in the sense that it benefits from a presumption of truth , it does not reveal , to remain effective , any of its assets , settling to enounce a reality @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to explain that , “ Algorithm would not have become a social power without the support of an ethical presupposition ( the consecration of Homo Economicus ) , a postulation towards scientificism ( thus to universality ) and a technological rupture ( big data ) .
” Branco breaks it down to the formula “ Algorithmization is the foundation of sovereignty.
” And that ’ s exactly what Assange challenged .
And that ’ s why he ’ s such a divisive , eternally controversial figure , unlike Edward Snowden , who ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a sterling IQ – who simply wants to reform a system .
When he worked on behalf of Assange , Branco essentially coordinated a team of lawyers responding to star judge Baltasar Garzon , who was present at Woolwich Crown Court earlier this week .
Last week , Assange ’ s legal team said they would apply for asylum in France .
Branco can ’ t possibly be part of the team because of “ Crepuscule ” – which eviscerates Macron .
Le Petit Roi , for his part , may now be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
opportunity .
Ending a ghastly neo-Orwellian charade , offering asylum to Assange , and ridiculing Trump and Boris Johnson at the same time would enhance his status in myriad European latitudes and all across the Global South .
Yet there should be no illusions .
On July 3 , 2015 , advised by his legal team , Assange wrote an op-ed for Le Monde asking about the possibility of asylum .
Only one hour after publication the Elysee Palace – under Francois Hollande – issued a firm denial .
There were no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ applied by the U.S .
Deep State .
Assange lawyer Geoffrey Robertson is under no illusions : “ He won ’ t be pardoned by President Trump , although [ a future ] President Sanders might do so .
I think that ’ s the objective of the Pentagon — to put him in prison for the rest of his life.
” A measure of the cowardice of all those established newspapers who profited handsomely from the work of Assange and WikiLeaks is this despicable Le Monde editorial that half-heartedly pretends to defend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It ’ s idle to expect from Anglo-American corporate media even a modicum of decency to admit that journalists must not be treated as spies and dangerous criminals .
Criminalization of critical thinking – capable of provoking , unmasking and denouncing raw power — is a key plank of the new dictatorship examined by Onfray , and already in effect .
Now it comes down to Onfray and Branco not to be lost in translation – and forcefully demonstrate to the Anglosphere that the heart of darkness must not be allowed to prevail @

By offering asylum to the persecuted publisher of WikiLeaks, France’s Macron would enhance his status in myriad European latitudes and all across the Global South, writes Pepe Escobar.
It’s quite fitting that the – imperially pre-determined – judicial fate of Julian Assange is being played out in Britain, the home of George Orwell.
As chronicled by the painful, searing reports of Ambassador Craig Murray, what’s taking place in Woolwich Crown Court is a sub-Orwellian farce with Conradian overtones: the horror…the horror…, remixed for the Raging Twenties. The heart of our moral darkness is not in the Congo: it’s in a dingy courtroom attached to a prison, presided by a lowly imperial lackey.
In one of Michel Onfray’s books published last year, “Theorie de la Dictature” (Robert Laffont) – the top dissident, politically incorrect French philosopher starts exactly from Orwell to examine the key features of a new-look dictatorship. He tracks seven paths of destruction: to destroy freedom, impoverish language, abolish truth, suppress history, deny nature, propagate hate, and aspire to empire.
Michel Onfray in 2009. (Alexandre López, CC BY 2.0, Wikimedia Commons)
To destroy freedom, Onfray stresses, power needs to assure perpetual surveillance; ruin personal life; suppress solitude; make opinion uniform and denounce thought crimes. That sounds like the road map for the United States government’s persecution of Assange.
Other paths, as in impoverishing language, include practicing newspeak; using double language; destroying words; oralizing language; speaking a single language; and suppressing the classics. That sounds like the modus operandi of the ruling classes in the Hegemon.
To abolish truth, power must teach ideology; instrumentalize the press; propagate fake news; and produce reality. To propagate hate, power, among other instruments, must create an enemy; foment wars; and psychiatrize critical thinking.
There’s no question we are already mired deep inside this neo-Orwellian dystopia.
John “Paradise Lost” Milton, in 1642, could not have been more prophetic, when he wrote “Those that hurt the eyes of the people blame them for being blind.” How not to identify a direct parallel with Le Petit Roi Emmanuel Macron’s army, month after month, willfully blinding protesting Gilets Jaunes/Yellow Vests in the streets of France.
Orwell was more straightforward than Milton, saying that to talk about freedom is meaningless unless it refers to the freedom to tell people what they don’t want to hear. And he put it in context by quoting a line from Milton: “By the known rules of ancient liberty.”
No “known rules of ancient liberty” are allowed to penetrate the heart of darkness of Woolwich Crown Court.
A Spy at the Service of the People
Juan Branco is arguably the most brilliant young French intellectual – heir to a fine Sartre/Foucault/Deleuze tradition. The French establishment detests him, especially because of his best-seller “Crepuscule,” where he dissected Macronism – branded as a thuggish regime – from the inside, and the French president as a creature and instrument of a tiny oligarchy.
Julian Assange. (YouTube still)
He has just published “Assange: L’Antisouverain” (Les Editions du Cerf), an absorbing, erudite study that he defines as “a philosophy book about the figure of the Anti-Sovereign.” The Sovereign is of course the state apparatus.
Here (in French) is an excellent interview with Branco about the book. There’s nothing even remotely comparable to it in the Anglosphere, which has treated Assange essentially as an unpleasant freak, oozing pedestrian slander and piling up sub-ideology tirades disguised as facts.
The book is essentially structured as a seminary for the hyper-selective Ecole Normale Superieure, the august school in the Latin Quarter here that shapes French elites, a privileged nest of power institutions and reproduction of privileges. Branco takes the reader to the heart of this universe just to make him or her discover Assange from the point of view of one of those students.
Branco was privileged to profit from the interaction between the Ecole Normale Superieure and Yale. He met Assange at the Ecuadorian embassy in January 2014, “in a state of radical confinement,” and then followed him as a juridical consultant, then lawyer, “day after day,” until meeting him again in September 2016, “getting ready to no less than change the course of the American presidential election and engineer the fall of the one who had sworn to crush him, one Hillary Rodham Clinton.”
Branco is fascinated by Assange’s “scientific journalism,” and his capacity to “intervene in the political space without occupying a determined place.” Assange is painted as a contemporary oracle, a maniac for free access to information, someone who “never looked for a reward, or insertion, or juridical protection,” which is a totally different modus operandi from any media.
2016 portrait of Juan Branco. (Yale University, Wikimedia Commons)
Branco shows how WikiLeaks “allowed whistleblowers to act,” by growing an archive parallel to the “production of data related to the mechanism of contemporary power apparatuses.” Under this framework “every citizen is able to become a researcher.”
So, Assange’s work has been about redistributing power. It’s as if Assange had become a “spy at the service of the people.” And that leads Branco to draw the connection with the Gilets Jaunes/Yellow Vests. WikiLeaks releasing the “Macron Leaks” in 2017 legitimized the Yellow Vest struggle for direct democracy.
Branco describes Assange as “a strange figure, a bridge between the pre-history of digital civilization and its definitive penetration as a primordial, structural element of political and social space.”
But arguably his best appraisal is of Assange as “a dissident of his own internal space, mostly interested by the sphere of cultural, economic and social domination in which he was born, that of the American imperium, of which his native Australia is one of the most dedicated allies, and that dominates this cyber-space where he constituted himself as a political actor.”
In what could be construed as the top reason for the United States government’s unbounded thirst for vengeance against Assange, he challenged the fact that “American acts have a natural regulatory function for the rest of the world, a result of their over-dominance of the contemporary geopolitical space.”
It’s All in the Algorithm
A view from the Member’s Gallery inside the New York Stock Exchange, August 2008. (Ryan Lawler, Wikimedia Commons)
And that brings us to the heart of the matter: algorithms. As Branco synthesizes it, the “revelation of raw documents aims at reinvesting in the political space those that have been discarded because of their submission to a word of authority whose algorithms have been masked.”
Onfray had already warned about “destroying words,” “impoverishing language” and clinging to newspeak – but Branco takes it to a new level. Because “the word of power is a word assimilated to the algorithm, in the sense that it benefits from a presumption of truth, it does not reveal, to remain effective, any of its assets, settling to enounce a reality impossible to contest.”
Branco is careful to explain that, “Algorithm would not have become a social power without the support of an ethical presupposition (the consecration of Homo Economicus), a postulation towards scientificism (thus to universality) and a technological rupture (big data).”
Branco breaks it down to the formula “Algorithmization is the foundation of sovereignty.” And that’s exactly what Assange challenged. And that’s why he’s such a divisive, eternally controversial figure, unlike Edward Snowden, who’s basically an average guy – with a sterling IQ – who simply wants to reform a system.
A Chance for Liberty, Equality and Fraternity?
When he worked on behalf of Assange, Branco essentially coordinated a team of lawyers responding to star judge Baltasar Garzon, who was present at Woolwich Crown Court earlier this week. Last week, Assange’s legal team said they would apply for asylum in France. Branco can’t possibly be part of the team because of “Crepuscule” – which eviscerates Macron.
President Emmanuel Macron celebrating France’s victory over Croatia in the 2018 World Cup final in Moscow. (Kremlin)
Le Petit Roi, for his part, may now be presented with the ultimate global reach P.R. opportunity. Ending a ghastly neo-Orwellian charade, offering asylum to Assange, and ridiculing Trump and Boris Johnson at the same time would enhance his status in myriad European latitudes and all across the Global South.
Yet there should be no illusions. On July 3, 2015, advised by his legal team, Assange wrote an op-ed for Le Monde asking about the possibility of asylum. Only one hour after publication the Elysee Palace – under Francois Hollande – issued a firm denial. There were no leaks on what kind of pressure was applied by the U.S. Deep State.
Assange lawyer Geoffrey Robertson is under no illusions: “He won’t be pardoned by President Trump, although [a future] President Sanders might do so. I think that’s the objective of the Pentagon — to put him in prison for the rest of his life.”
A measure of the cowardice of all those established newspapers who profited handsomely from the work of Assange and WikiLeaks is this despicable Le Monde editorial that half-heartedly pretends to defend him as a journalist and publisher.
It’s idle to expect from Anglo-American corporate media even a modicum of decency to admit that journalists must not be treated as spies and dangerous criminals. Criminalization of critical thinking – capable of provoking, unmasking and denouncing raw power — is a key plank of the new dictatorship examined by Onfray, and already in effect. Now it comes down to Onfray and Branco not to be lost in translation – and forcefully demonstrate to the Anglosphere that the heart of darkness must not be allowed to prevail.


russiainsider--2020-03-04--Russia Censors Disney’s First Openly Gay Character From ‘Onward’

Russian distributors appear to have censored Disney and Pixar ’ s first LGBT character from their animated film “ Onward , ” the Kinopoisk.ru movie website reported Wednesday .
“ Onward , ” a fantasy-adventure that hits the big screens in Russia on March 5 , introduces a cyclops police officer named Specter as the studios ’ first-self identified lesbian character .
Officer Specter appears in one scene , where she casually mentions having a girlfriend .
Viewers who watched “ Onward ” dubbed in Russian told Kinopoisk that the word “ girlfriend ” had been changed to the more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Specter ’ s gender .
“ Presumably , Disney ’ s Russia branch tried to avoid unnecessary problems with the anticipated project ’ s release , ” the website wrote .
A Disney spokesperson in Russia declined to comment on Kinopoisk ’ s queries .
This is at least the third known censorship of a gay scene from a foreign film in Russia since the country passed a controversial 2013 law banning “ homosexual propaganda ” to minors .
Last year , Russian distributors cut gay sex and kissing scenes from the Elton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Russia ’ s version of Marvel ’ s “ Avengers : Endgame ” altered a gay character ’ s description of a date to the less romantic “ dinner.
” Non-LGBT scenes have also faced tweaks before hitting Russian cinemas .
Sergei , a Russian villain in the 2019 animated film “ The Secret Life of Pets 2 , ” became a Frenchman named Serge in the film ’ s Russian version .
Last year ’ s superhero film “ Hellboy ” replaced the titular character ’ s mention of Stalin with Hitler @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other movies , including “ The Death of Stalin ” and “ Child 44 , ” for their portrayal of sensitive subjects in the Soviet past .

“Onward,” a fantasy-adventure that hits the big screens in Russia on March 5, introduces a cyclops police officer named Specter as the studios’ first-self identified lesbian character. Pixar Animation Studios
Russian distributors appear to have censored Disney and Pixar’s first LGBT character from their animated film “Onward,” the Kinopoisk.ru movie website reported Wednesday.
“Onward,” a fantasy-adventure that hits the big screens in Russia on March 5, introduces a cyclops police officer named Specter as the studios’ first-self identified lesbian character. Officer Specter appears in one scene, where she casually mentions having a girlfriend.
Viewers who watched “Onward” dubbed in Russian told Kinopoisk that the word “girlfriend” had been changed to the more neutral “partner” and avoids mentioning Specter’s gender.
“Presumably, Disney’s Russia branch tried to avoid unnecessary problems with the anticipated project’s release,” the website wrote.
A Disney spokesperson in Russia declined to comment on Kinopoisk’s queries.
This is at least the third known censorship of a gay scene from a foreign film in Russia since the country passed a controversial 2013 law banning “homosexual propaganda” to minors.
Last year, Russian distributors cut gay sex and kissing scenes from the Elton John biopic “Rocketman.” Similarly, Russia’s version of Marvel’s “Avengers: Endgame” altered a gay character’s description of a date to the less romantic “dinner.”
Non-LGBT scenes have also faced tweaks before hitting Russian cinemas.
Sergei, a Russian villain in the 2019 animated film “The Secret Life of Pets 2,” became a Frenchman named Serge in the film’s Russian version.
Last year’s superhero film “Hellboy” replaced the titular character’s mention of Stalin with Hitler.
Russia has also canceled screenings of other movies, including “The Death of Stalin” and “Child 44,” for their portrayal of sensitive subjects in the Soviet past.


russiainsider--2020-03-04--Anti-Empire.com Has by Far the Best Coverage of the Exploding Russia/Turkey/Syria Conflict

RI is still on low simmer , so we recommend this excellent , reader-supported site .
They are doing the best job of combing the alt-media for good analysis , and then presenting it in a way that makes sense .
Forget about the mainstream when it comes to the Middle East - it is just pure lies .
Checkpoint Asia is an excellent new site which scours the media for the best Asia news with a geopolitical focus , plus 1st-class original journalism ranging from Russia to China to the Middle East .
Smart , incisive , and free @ @ @ @ @ @ @ donate !
They have a great Facebook page , with very good memes .
When it comes to the war in Syria and the corresponding US-Russian-Turkish-Israeli-Iranian-Saudi-European shoving contest it represents I would divide media outlets into three distinct groups .
1 . )
First , you have the vast majority of media which almost never reports on it .
Not because the Syria is not interesting or critically important ( what could be more important than a US-Russian or a Turkish-Russian shoving match ?
? )
but because they are clueless and do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ events absolutely force them to nonetheless cover it they fall back to doing stenography for the Pentagon and the State Department .
A distinct subset of this clueless brigade are the supposedly bleeding-heart liberals who raise their heads every couple of months to call for the West to bomb Syria so they can have the cheap feel-good thrill of “ doing something ” against an imaginary Hitler .
2 . )
Secondly , you have specialized alt-media outlets like South Front and Al-Masdar which report on the war daily and know their stuff @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the tactical level and report every minute detail , but without giving the context or the political dimension .
They ’ re good for someone who already knows everything about the war ( or thinks he does ) and is only following along as it develops further .
However , they ’ re poor entry points for someone who is still learning or doesn ’ t have the inclination to wade through headlines about every minor airstrike or clash .
3 . )
Thirdly you have places like Moon of Alabama and Sic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tactical stuff and instead deliver insightful analysis and commentary which provide that much-needed context to make sense of it all .
However , these outlets are not so much in the ‘ covering Syria ’ business as they are in the ‘ making insightful comments ’ business which means their coverage is understandably spotty .
Often something very important will take place in Syria but they won ’ t have a post about it because perhaps that day or week they ’ re occupied with another topic .
They ’ re good places @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but you can ’ t be certain you ’ re staying on top of things just by following them .
Finally , there ’ s Anti-Empire .
I ’ ve compiled news on it and written about developments there since 2015 , first for Russia Insider ( back in the days of the US-Russian Race for the Euphrates and the deadly Standoff at Al-Tanf ) and now on here .
And I do it in a unique style where I leave out the mundane tactical stuff .
Instead , Anti-Empire will have something @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wider strategic or political implication , but here ’ s the catch — it will have all such events .
Even when the site has nothing on the conflict there , because there ’ s nothing that rises above the threshold of the tactical , I ’ m still staying on top of what ’ s happening there .
If something happens that reaches beyond that you can be sure Anti-Empire will cover it , and will do so with the context necessary to understand the political and strategic dimension rather than pester @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It ’ s an outlet which if you ’ re following you can be sure you ’ re on top of all the really important stuff even when there hasn ’ t been a Syria headline in weeks or even months .
Yet when things heat up all the context to enable even a relative newbie to begin to understand what is going on will be there .
All that without sacrificing any of the depth but instead giving the complete story with all its twists and turns as it happens ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If you have followed Anti-Empire ’ s coverage of the recent escalation that has now led to what has to be called a Turkish-Syrian war and may yet lead to a Turkish-Russian ( and even NATO-Russian one ) this is the journey you would have taken : Erdogan Rages Against Russia and the Syrian Idlib Offensive Steamrolling Al-Qaeda Syrian Army Advances to Outskirts of Uber-Strategic Town of Saraqib , Erdogan Threatens “ Military Force ” Undeterred by Arrival of Turkish Military the Syrian Army Continues Advance , Cuts Key Highway , Reaches Edge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Putin for Syria to Relinquish Gains or He ’ s Joining the War on AQ ’ s Side Military Genius Erdogan Gets Hundreds More of His Troops Encircled in Syria 5 More Turkish Soldiers Perish Under Syrian Army Artillery Fire in Syria Erdogan Is Quietly Integrating Syrian Refugees to Gain More Voters , Wombs and Islamists Photos Surface of the Turkish Army Convoy Devastated by Syrian Artillery Last Week Turkey Claims Has Killed “ 101 ” Syrian Troops Nobody Knew Were “ Dead ” , But Not Claiming Helicopter Downing That Actually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bandwagon to Deepen Wedge Between Russia and Turkey Inside a Single Week Syrian Troops Fought Turkey , Israel , the US and Al-Qaeda Turkish Hand Suspected as 2nd Syrian Army Helicopter Shot Down in Days NATO Has No Plans to Provide Military Support to Turkey in Syria ’ s Idlib Erdogan Raises Stakes in Syria , Launches Offensive vs Syrian Army , Russians Intervene on Opposite Side Turkey Seeks US Military Backing for an Air Offensive in Syria US Military Spokesman Says Idlib Is a Magnet for Terrorist Groups Who Are a “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Civilians ‘ Syrian ’ Footage of Deadly Airstrikes on Turkish Military Shows They Were Actually Russian Strikes Russia ’ s Defense Minister Hosts Libya ’ s Haftar in Moscow to Mess With Erdogan ( Russian ? )
Warplanes Drop Bombs Next to Turkish Column in Syria , Force It to Halt Advance Will Turkey Drag America Into a ‘ World War III Scenario ’ With Russia ?
Turkish Secular Opposition Tells Erdogan to Contain the Refugee Crisis by Working With Assad , Against al-Qaeda Erdogan Calls Kremlin to Bail Him From His Idlib @ @ @ @ @ @ @ His Military Pompeo Demands Syria Institutes a ‘ Permanent Ceasefire ’ With al-Qaeda , Says Looking for Ways to Help Turkey Erdogan Vows to Risk Everything to Save Idlib for al-Qaeda , Reiterates February-End Deadline for Syrian-Russian Retreat Erdogan Has Been Telling Everyone and Their Mother He Is Meeting Putin on the 5th .
Putin Says Has No Plans to Meet Him 33 KIA in Airstrike on Turkish HQ in Syria .
Russia Denies Ankara ’ s Request to Evacuate the Wounded by Air Russians-Syrians Had to React to Turkey ’ s Strikes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Towel Turks Shoot Down 2 Syrian Su-24s in One Day , Turkish-Qaeda Offensive in Full Swing , Taking Ground From Syrian Army Erdogan Gets His Putin Meeting , but It ’ s He Who ’ ll Have to Go to Russia Wounded and Shaken the Syrian Army Goes on the Counter-Offensive , Wins Russia Deploys Military Police to Highway That Erdogan Demands Syrian Army Gives Back to Al-Qaeda Turkey Is Busing Migrants to Greek Border , Rejects EU ’ s €1 Billion Offer to Knock It Off Then there ’ s a wholly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in northeastern Syria but about that at another time .

RI is still on low simmer, so we recommend this excellent, reader-supported site. They are doing the best job of combing the alt-media for good analysis, and then presenting it in a way that makes sense. Forget about the mainstream when it comes to the Middle East - it is just pure lies.
Checkpoint Asia is an excellent new site which scours the media for the best Asia news with a geopolitical focus, plus 1st-class original journalism ranging from Russia to China to the Middle East. Smart, incisive, and free of globalist baloney. Reader-supported, please donate! They have a great Facebook page, with very good memes.
When it comes to the war in Syria and the corresponding US-Russian-Turkish-Israeli-Iranian-Saudi-European shoving contest it represents I would divide media outlets into three distinct groups.
1.) First, you have the vast majority of media which almost never reports on it. Not because the Syria is not interesting or critically important (what could be more important than a US-Russian or a Turkish-Russian shoving match??) but because they are clueless and do not know where to start. When events absolutely force them to nonetheless cover it they fall back to doing stenography for the Pentagon and the State Department. A distinct subset of this clueless brigade are the supposedly bleeding-heart liberals who raise their heads every couple of months to call for the West to bomb Syria so they can have the cheap feel-good thrill of “doing something” against an imaginary Hitler.
2.) Secondly, you have specialized alt-media outlets like South Front and Al-Masdar which report on the war daily and know their stuff. They, however, focus on the tactical level and report every minute detail, but without giving the context or the political dimension. They’re good for someone who already knows everything about the war (or thinks he does) and is only following along as it develops further. However, they’re poor entry points for someone who is still learning or doesn’t have the inclination to wade through headlines about every minor airstrike or clash.
3.) Thirdly you have places like Moon of Alabama and Sic Semper Tyrannis which leave out the daily tactical stuff and instead deliver insightful analysis and commentary which provide that much-needed context to make sense of it all. However, these outlets are not so much in the ‘covering Syria’ business as they are in the ‘making insightful comments’ business which means their coverage is understandably spotty. Often something very important will take place in Syria but they won’t have a post about it because perhaps that day or week they’re occupied with another topic. They’re good places to seek additional analysis and interesting opinion but you can’t be certain you’re staying on top of things just by following them.
Finally, there’s Anti-Empire. I’ve compiled news on it and written about developments there since 2015, first for Russia Insider (back in the days of the US-Russian Race for the Euphrates and the deadly Standoff at Al-Tanf) and now on here. And I do it in a unique style where I leave out the mundane tactical stuff. Instead, Anti-Empire will have something on Syria only when it has a wider strategic or political implication, but here’s the catch — it will have all such events.
Even when the site has nothing on the conflict there, because there’s nothing that rises above the threshold of the tactical, I’m still staying on top of what’s happening there. If something happens that reaches beyond that you can be sure Anti-Empire will cover it, and will do so with the context necessary to understand the political and strategic dimension rather than pester you with the recitation of standalone facts.
It’s an outlet which if you’re following you can be sure you’re on top of all the really important stuff even when there hasn’t been a Syria headline in weeks or even months. Yet when things heat up all the context to enable even a relative newbie to begin to understand what is going on will be there.
All that without sacrificing any of the depth but instead giving the complete story with all its twists and turns as it happens (and always big on maps). If you have followed Anti-Empire’s coverage of the recent escalation that has now led to what has to be called a Turkish-Syrian war and may yet lead to a Turkish-Russian (and even NATO-Russian one) this is the journey you would have taken:
Syrian Army Offensive Envelops Large Strategic Town, Cuts Key Highway, Encircles Another Turkish Outpost
Erdogan Rages Against Russia and the Syrian Idlib Offensive Steamrolling Al-Qaeda
Syrian Army Advances to Outskirts of Uber-Strategic Town of Saraqib, Erdogan Threatens “Military Force”
6 Turkish Soldiers Killed by Syrian Artillery, After Turkey Rushes Troops Protect Al-Qaeda
Undeterred by Arrival of Turkish Military the Syrian Army Continues Advance, Cuts Key Highway, Reaches Edge of Saraqib
Erdogan Says He Issued Ultimatum to Putin for Syria to Relinquish Gains or He’s Joining the War on AQ’s Side
Military Genius Erdogan Gets Hundreds More of His Troops Encircled in Syria
5 More Turkish Soldiers Perish Under Syrian Army Artillery Fire in Syria
Erdogan Is Quietly Integrating Syrian Refugees to Gain More Voters, Wombs and Islamists
Photos Surface of the Turkish Army Convoy Devastated by Syrian Artillery Last Week
Turkey Claims Has Killed “101” Syrian Troops Nobody Knew Were “Dead”, But Not Claiming Helicopter Downing That Actually Happened
Trump Admin Gets on the Al-Qaeda Bandwagon to Deepen Wedge Between Russia and Turkey
Turkey’s NATO Military Is Now Al-Qaeda’s Artillery Corps
Inside a Single Week Syrian Troops Fought Turkey, Israel, the US and Al-Qaeda
Turkish Hand Suspected as 2nd Syrian Army Helicopter Shot Down in Days
Erdogan Escalates Threats, Syria Ignores Him, Scores Massive Gains
NATO Has No Plans to Provide Military Support to Turkey in Syria’s Idlib
Erdogan Raises Stakes in Syria, Launches Offensive vs Syrian Army, Russians Intervene on Opposite Side
Turkey Seeks US Military Backing for an Air Offensive in Syria
US Military Spokesman Says Idlib Is a Magnet for Terrorist Groups Who Are a “Menace and a Threat” to Its Civilians
VIDEO: Turkish Troops Fire Missile at Russian Strike Aircraft
‘Syrian’ Footage of Deadly Airstrikes on Turkish Military Shows They Were Actually Russian Strikes
Russia’s Defense Minister Hosts Libya’s Haftar in Moscow to Mess With Erdogan
(Russian?) Warplanes Drop Bombs Next to Turkish Column in Syria, Force It to Halt Advance
Will Turkey Drag America Into a ‘World War III Scenario’ With Russia?
Turkish Secular Opposition Tells Erdogan to Contain the Refugee Crisis by Working With Assad, Against al-Qaeda
Erdogan Calls Kremlin to Bail Him From His Idlib Fiasco, Pitiless Putin Lines Up Behind His Military
Pompeo Demands Syria Institutes a ‘Permanent Ceasefire’ With al-Qaeda, Says Looking for Ways to Help Turkey
Erdogan Vows to Risk Everything to Save Idlib for al-Qaeda, Reiterates February-End Deadline for Syrian-Russian Retreat
Syrian Army Collapses a Chunk of Southern Idlib Pocket, but Turkish-Rebel Offensive Takes Back Critical Town
Erdogan Has Been Telling Everyone and Their Mother He Is Meeting Putin on the 5th. Putin Says Has No Plans to Meet Him
33 KIA in Airstrike on Turkish HQ in Syria. Russia Denies Ankara’s Request to Evacuate the Wounded by Air
Russians-Syrians Had to React to Turkey’s Strikes on Syrian Army or Throw in the Towel
Israel Sends Condolences for Turkish “Martyrs”. Erdogan Expands War to Hezbollah, Iran
Turks Shoot Down 2 Syrian Su-24s in One Day, Turkish-Qaeda Offensive in Full Swing, Taking Ground From Syrian Army
Erdogan Gets His Putin Meeting, but It’s He Who’ll Have to Go to Russia
Wounded and Shaken the Syrian Army Goes on the Counter-Offensive, Wins
Russia Deploys Military Police to Highway That Erdogan Demands Syrian Army Gives Back to Al-Qaeda
Turkey Is Busing Migrants to Greek Border, Rejects EU’s €1 Billion Offer to Knock It Off
Then there’s a wholly separate US-Russian wrestling match to the east in northeastern Syria but about that at another time.


russiainsider--2020-03-04--Great Video of Putin Visiting One of Most Important Russian Monasteries, Near St. Petersburg (Valaam

Great Video of Putin Visiting One of Most Important Russian Monasteries, Near St. Petersburg (Valaam)

Valaam is reputedly Putin ; s 'favorite ' monastery , to which , it is rumored , he has donated personal funds .
Apparently he developed a relationship with the Valaam brethren while living in St. Petersburg over 20 years ago .
Valaam is a few hours northwest of St. Petersburg .
It is a truly extraordinary place .
The way in which Russians have brought back the rich monastic traditions of the past is highly unusual .
Nothing like it exists in the West , neither among Catholics or Protestants Vladimir Putin and President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko visited @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is one of the most revered holy places in Russia , where the oldest monastery , the Transfiguration Monastery , is located .
Vladimir Putin is known in these places and has long been following the fate of the monastery .
Today , the leaders of the two countries have a day of informal communication .
They attended a service in the main cathedral of the monastery , in several monasteries and communicated with parishioners .
Thousands of pilgrims from all countries where the Russian Church preaches go to the northern island of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Alexander Lukashenko , calls himself an Orthodox atheist , he accepted the invitation of Vladimir Putin to visit this oldest monastery .
“ I 'm glad that I came here for the first time together with my friend , ” says Lukashenko .
Almost a thousand years ago , the monastery on Valaam was founded by the Monks Sergius and German .
Their relics are the main shrine of the monastery .
In the Transfiguration Cathedral of the monastery , both the revered Valaam icon of the Mother of God , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cosmonauts on an orbital expedition , and , of course , the cathedral itself , especially its summer , second floor , amaze the imagination with its picturesque decoration .
The Valaam monastery has almost two hundred monks .
Many serve in remote monasteries , of which there are now eighteen .
The largest and strictest is All Saints .
And this here is the Smolensk monastery .
The original brick with the sign of the old Valaam factory dates from 1914 .
“ This is a brick built in 1914 .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And this , in fact , was the last church of the old Valaam , still pre-revolutionary , ” says Bishop Troitsky , hegumen of the Transfiguration of Valaam stauropegic monastery Pankraty .
A temple with a dome similar to a hero ’ s helmet was built on Valaam at the request of Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolayevich , Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Army at the beginning of the First World War .
He wanted a prayer for the fallen defenders of the Fatherland to always be heard in this holy place .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and was revived in 2006 , when the devastated Smolensky monastery was restored .
Vladimir Putin showed Alexander Lukashenko a new memorial chapel in a historical place .
In the chapel of Smolensk Skete , the monks of Valaam commemorate those who died during the siege of Leningrad every day .
Now in the third book of memory , the page is open with the letter `` B '' , the remaining 28 volumes of this mournful list are also stored here .
Also , the funeral services for soldiers of the Russian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before the operation in Syria are read every day in the chapel .
For a thousand years , the Valaam monastery was repeatedly restored from nonexistence .
And now , after the desolation of the Soviet era , almost all churches are repaired and restored .
However , there are not only churches : the monks also keep about forty cows that provide the monastery with milk .
In recent years , after serious technical re-equipment , they began to produce their own cheese , well-known even beyond the Russian North .
Among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unclimbed rocky shores of the Ladoga skerries , new points of attraction for pilgrims appear , such as this chapel of the Valaam Icon of the Mother of God on Svetly Island .
The monastery in honor of the Holy Prince Vladimir is one of the creations of the Valaam icon-painting workshops .
It is also one of the new temples of the monastery , intended for solitary monastic prayer .
The heads of Russia and Belarus practically did not violate either the special way of life of the monks , or even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could easily meet with pilgrim presidents at a meeting .

Valaam is reputedly Putin;s 'favorite' monastery, to which, it is rumored, he has donated personal funds. Apparently he developed a relationship with the Valaam brethren while living in St. Petersburg over 20 years ago. Valaam is a few hours northwest of St. Petersburg. It is a truly extraordinary place. The way in which Russians have brought back the rich monastic traditions of the past is highly unusual. Nothing like it exists in the West, neither among Catholics or Protestants
Transcript:
Vladimir Putin and President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko visited Valaam today. The island in Karelia is one of the most revered holy places in Russia, where the oldest monastery, the Transfiguration Monastery, is located.
Vladimir Putin is known in these places and has long been following the fate of the monastery. Today, the leaders of the two countries have a day of informal communication. They attended a service in the main cathedral of the monastery, in several monasteries and communicated with parishioners.
Thousands of pilgrims from all countries where the Russian Church preaches go to the northern island of Valaam. Although the President of Belarus, Alexander Lukashenko, calls himself an Orthodox atheist, he accepted the invitation of Vladimir Putin to visit this oldest monastery.
“I'm glad that I came here for the first time together with my friend,” says Lukashenko.
Almost a thousand years ago, the monastery on Valaam was founded by the Monks Sergius and German. Their relics are the main shrine of the monastery.
In the Transfiguration Cathedral of the monastery, both the revered Valaam icon of the Mother of God, and her list, which accompanied the Russian cosmonauts on an orbital expedition, and, of course, the cathedral itself, especially its summer, second floor, amaze the imagination with its picturesque decoration.
The Valaam monastery has almost two hundred monks. Many serve in remote monasteries, of which there are now eighteen. The largest and strictest is All Saints.
And this here is the Smolensk monastery. The original brick with the sign of the old Valaam factory dates from 1914.
“This is a brick built in 1914. The church was finished and consecrated in 1917. And this, in fact, was the last church of the old Valaam, still pre-revolutionary,” says Bishop Troitsky, hegumen of the Transfiguration of Valaam stauropegic monastery Pankraty.
A temple with a dome similar to a hero’s helmet was built on Valaam at the request of Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolayevich, Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Army at the beginning of the First World War. He wanted a prayer for the fallen defenders of the Fatherland to always be heard in this holy place. The tradition was interrupted in Soviet times and was revived in 2006, when the devastated Smolensky monastery was restored. Vladimir Putin showed Alexander Lukashenko a new memorial chapel in a historical place.
In the chapel of Smolensk Skete, the monks of Valaam commemorate those who died during the siege of Leningrad every day. Now in the third book of memory, the page is open with the letter "B", the remaining 28 volumes of this mournful list are also stored here. Also, the funeral services for soldiers of the Russian army who died from the 18th century before the operation in Syria are read every day in the chapel.
For a thousand years, the Valaam monastery was repeatedly restored from nonexistence. And now, after the desolation of the Soviet era, almost all churches are repaired and restored. However, there are not only churches: the monks also keep about forty cows that provide the monastery with milk. In recent years, after serious technical re-equipment, they began to produce their own cheese, well-known even beyond the Russian North.
Among the centuries-old Karelian pines, on previously unclimbed rocky shores of the Ladoga skerries, new points of attraction for pilgrims appear, such as this chapel of the Valaam Icon of the Mother of God on Svetly Island. The monastery in honor of the Holy Prince Vladimir is one of the creations of the Valaam icon-painting workshops. It is also one of the new temples of the monastery, intended for solitary monastic prayer.
The heads of Russia and Belarus practically did not violate either the special way of life of the monks, or even the schedule of excursions for tourists who could easily meet with pilgrim presidents at a meeting.


russiainsider--2020-03-05--Erdogan Is in Serious Political Trouble at Home, and Outside Turkey - Is This the End?

He 's trying to become the Overlord of the Middle East , and it will destroy him .
It looks like Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is headed for the political gallows a lot quicker than I ever thought .
His offensive in Idlib has bogged down .
And a day before he ’ s scheduled to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow Erdogan Turkish parliament degrades quickly as opposition speaks out against his Syria campaign .
Now , apparently fistfights in Turkish parliament aren ’ t that uncommon since one took place back in 2016 over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through back then .
It ’ s clear Erdogan ’ s support at home is deteriorating quickly .
And his push into Syria is a grave miscalculation as I ’ ve noted in other posts ( here and here ) .
I spoke with Sputnik Radio ’ s newest show , Political Misfits , on this making the point that Erdogan is still convinced he can fill the vacuum left by a retreating U.S. to become the regional overlord in a new Middle East .
Yes , really , he ’ s that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Moscow for tomorrow ’ s meeting is that not only will Erdogan not get any of Idlib from Putin , he ’ ll lose everything else in the process .
Remember , Russia holds a lot of sway over the Turkish economy and , as such , controls a fair amount of Erdogan ’ s political capital hostage .
No matter how he tries to spin this , he ’ s the aggressor here and Putin knows he ’ s an unreliable partner .
The Russian Ministry of Defense isn ’ t playing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they systematically revealed the real narrative of U.S. support of the Syrian Civil War during the early stages of their military intervention it is now doing the same thing to Erdogan ’ s betrayal of the 2018 Sochi agreement .
In all of this the Russians have been a source of the closest thing we get to real information from Syria .
That this is never reported here in the West is criminal , but then again so is the campaign to destroy Syria .
It ’ s been Russia that has consistently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weapons false flags , helping us to prove what our instincts tell us is true .
And the standing of international organizations like the OPCW have suffered greatly .
With the latest report of a failed chemical weapons attack by Turkish-backed jihadists in Saraqib , Putin now has more than enough ammo to use against Erdogan at the U.N. Security Council .
And I expect that threat should be on the table when the two sit down to talk tomorrow .
Since their rapprochement after Turkey shot down a Russian SU-24 , Putin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his past crimes if his behavior dovetailed with Putin ’ s ultimate goal of restoring the territorial boundaries of Syria .
Putin ’ s done this multiple times in order to keep the fighting to a minimum and find ways to get the situation resolved .
But until Erdogan is defanged in Idlib there is no possibility of an end to the Syrian conflict .
He ’ s the key , because without his acting as the tip of NATO ’ s spear , there is no appetite for taking this further .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ behavior is in clear conflict with this the end is in sight .
As I said in my last article , Putin may have misjudged Erdogan ’ s ambitions but he could have also been giving him just enough rope to hang himself with .
And I believe Putin is near the point of seeing Erdogan as “ Not Agreement Capable , ” which is where he is with the United States .
He , frankly , doesn ’ t have any other choice .
This is likely Erdogan ’ s last of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s meeting will tell the tale .
Elijah Magnier is reporting a possible cease fire agreement but only if Turkey yields the entire M4 highway .
In my opinion , that would be the equivalent of surrender terms .
Autocracy is , at best , a meta-stable form of government .
And Erdogan ’ s moves to concentrate power in his hands have pushed things in Turkey dangerously in that direction .
Failure at this level of international high stakes poker usually ends badly for the guy who bets the farm on a @ @

He's trying to become the Overlord of the Middle East, and it will destroy him.
“Whom the gods would destroy they first make mad”
— Henry Wadsworth Longfellow “Prometheus”
It looks like Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is headed for the political gallows a lot quicker than I ever thought.
His offensive in Idlib has bogged down. And a day before he’s scheduled to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow Erdogan Turkish parliament degrades quickly as opposition speaks out against his Syria campaign.
This prompted a fistfight.
When a member of #Turkey’s Parliament, #Engin_Özkoç bravely criticised #Erdoğan’s operation & involvement in #Syria, members of the #AKP took offence & launched a fist fight in Parliament against him & other CHP members. https://t.co/mnSwrxERsg — Hala Jaber (@HalaJaber) March 4, 2020
Now, apparently fistfights in Turkish parliament aren’t that uncommon since one took place back in 2016 over the controversial changes to the constitution Erdogan rammed through back then.
It’s clear Erdogan’s support at home is deteriorating quickly. And his push into Syria is a grave miscalculation as I’ve noted in other posts (here and here).
I spoke with Sputnik Radio’s newest show, Political Misfits, on this making the point that Erdogan is still convinced he can fill the vacuum left by a retreating U.S. to become the regional overlord in a new Middle East.
Yes, really, he’s that delusional.
The noises coming out of Moscow for tomorrow’s meeting is that not only will Erdogan not get any of Idlib from Putin, he’ll lose everything else in the process.
Remember, Russia holds a lot of sway over the Turkish economy and, as such, controls a fair amount of Erdogan’s political capital hostage. No matter how he tries to spin this, he’s the aggressor here and Putin knows he’s an unreliable partner.
The Russian Ministry of Defense isn’t playing games. In the same way that they systematically revealed the real narrative of U.S. support of the Syrian Civil War during the early stages of their military intervention it is now doing the same thing to Erdogan’s betrayal of the 2018 Sochi agreement.
#SYRIA | ?? MoD: #Turkey has allowed its observation posts, established under 2018 #Sochi deal, to virtually merge with #terrorist bases in #Idlib. In violation of international law it has deployed a strike force the size of a mechanised division there ➡ https://t.co/s97qRUmLis pic.twitter.com/FPpiIufroA — Russian Embassy, Syria (@RusEmbSyria) March 4, 2020
In all of this the Russians have been a source of the closest thing we get to real information from Syria. That this is never reported here in the West is criminal, but then again so is the campaign to destroy Syria.
It’s been Russia that has consistently uncovered and disseminated early warnings of chemical weapons false flags, helping us to prove what our instincts tell us is true.
And the standing of international organizations like the OPCW have suffered greatly. With the latest report of a failed chemical weapons attack by Turkish-backed jihadists in Saraqib, Putin now has more than enough ammo to use against Erdogan at the U.N. Security Council.
And I expect that threat should be on the table when the two sit down to talk tomorrow.
Since their rapprochement after Turkey shot down a Russian SU-24, Putin has willing to give Erodgan cover for his past crimes if his behavior dovetailed with Putin’s ultimate goal of restoring the territorial boundaries of Syria.
Putin’s done this multiple times in order to keep the fighting to a minimum and find ways to get the situation resolved. But until Erdogan is defanged in Idlib there is no possibility of an end to the Syrian conflict.
He’s the key, because without his acting as the tip of NATO’s spear, there is no appetite for taking this further.
So now, with Erdogan’s behavior is in clear conflict with this the end is in sight. As I said in my last article, Putin may have misjudged Erdogan’s ambitions but he could have also been giving him just enough rope to hang himself with.
And I believe Putin is near the point of seeing Erdogan as “Not Agreement Capable,” which is where he is with the United States.
He, frankly, doesn’t have any other choice. This is likely Erdogan’s last of his nine political lives. Tomorrow’s meeting will tell the tale.
Elijah Magnier is reporting a possible cease fire agreement but only if Turkey yields the entire M4 highway. In my opinion, that would be the equivalent of surrender terms.
#Russia may accept a ceasefire with a guarantee M4 will be open IMMEDIATELY. Otherwise, it will be opened by fire, with a guarantee from #Turkey & deadline/schedule that all jihadists will be relocated from #Idlib. #Syria has the upper hand and doesn't need to give concessions. — Elijah J. Magnier (@ejmalrai) March 4, 2020
Autocracy is, at best, a meta-stable form of government. And Erdogan’s moves to concentrate power in his hands have pushed things in Turkey dangerously in that direction.
Failure at this level of international high stakes poker usually ends badly for the guy who bets the farm on a bluff.


russiainsider--2020-03-05--U.S. Breaks the Agreement it Just Signed with The Taliban

Today a U.S. fighter jet bombed a Taliban unit which was fighting with an Afghan government checkpoint .
The air attack came just a day after U.S. President Trump had a telephone call with the Taliban leaders in Doha .
The Taliban will likely see this as a breach of the recent ceasefire agreement between the U.S. and the Taliban .
The Russian Presidential Envoy for Afghanistan Zamir Kabulov supports that view : The Russians have called the U.S. `` nedogovorosposobny '' ( недоговороспособны ) which translate to `` not-agreement capable '' or unable to make and then abide by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 29 , the U.S. Special Representative for Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad and a commission of high ranking Taliban signed the Agreement for Bringing Peace to Afghanistan between the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan which is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban and the United States of America ( pdf ) .
( Yes , that is the real title . )
The Taliban were quite happy with the agreement : Shortly thereafter Stanikzai was seen shaking hands with Secretary of State Pompeo .
At the same @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. Defense Secretary Esper and NATO General Secretary Stoltenberg were in Kabul and signed a Joint Declaration between the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and the United States of America for Bringing Peace to Afghanistan ( pdf ) .
Neither the U.S. agreement with the Taliban nor the joint declaration with the Afghan government constitute a ceasefire between Afghan government and the Taliban .
Both agreements are designed to facilitate upcoming direct ceasefire negotiations between the Afghan government and the Taliban .
The joint declaration includes somewhat vague commitments of further military and economic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its troops .
But it noticeably does not include any commitment to use force in support of Afghan government operations against the Taliban .
The relevant passage says in Part One Point 2 and 3 : While listing al-Qaeda , ISIS and `` international terrorist groups '' the U.S. intentionally left out attacks by the Taliban .
Part One Point F of the U.S. agreement with the Taliban says : The fight between the Afghan Taliban and Afghan government forces is certainly a 'domestic affair ' .
Under this agreement the U.S. had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Those who defend today 's U.S. attack on the Taliban will argue that the Taliban broke the agreement by attacking a `` U.S. ally '' .
The U.S. agreement with the Taliban says under Part Two Point 1 : The strategic Agreement Between the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and AFGHANISTAN ( pdf ) signed at Kabul May 2 , 2012 designates Afghanistan as a `` Major Non-NATO Ally '' of the United States .
The argument is thus that Taliban attacks on Afghan government forces are attacks on a U.S. ally from which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ legal reading is that the more recent U.S. agreement with the Taliban as well as the joint statement with the Afghan government supersede that with regards to inner Afghan fighting which is clearly a 'domestic affair ' .
That the U.S. is not an honest partner is also visible in other parts of its recent Afghanistan agreements .
Part One C of the U.S. agreement with the Taliban says : The interesting point is that the 5.000 prisoners are actually prisoners of the Afghan government .
That the U.S. committed itself to release @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is quite curious .
It is also contradicted by the joint declaration with the Afghan government which was signed at the same time .
Part Two Point 4 of it says : A vague Afghan government commitment to `` participate in discussions '' about prisoner exchange seems to contradict the strong promise with a fixed date the U.S. made in the agreement with the Taliban .
When the U.S.government signs two agreements with different parties which contradict each other on the very same day it is clearly not-agreement capable .
Why should the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exchange which would clearly favor the Taliban ?
The sitting president of Afghanistan Ashraf Ghani immediately made the point : The Taliban demand the prisoner release before they will sit down with the Afghan government for ceasefire negotiations .
Ghani is currently fighting with Afghan government 's Chief Executive Abdullah Abdullah over who of them won the botched election in Afghanistan .
The U.S. has yet to accept one of them as the newly elected president .
Ghani will sabotage the prisoner release until Trump officially recognizes him as the newly elected president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the U.S. to stand to its agreement and to press Ghani to release their friends .
As long as that is not happening they will continue to fight : Yesterday Trump had a 35 minutes phone call with the deputy leader of the Taliban peace commission in Doha Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar .
The Taliban emphasized that the U.S. must stick to its agreement .
The Taliban readout of the call includes this exchange : The White House has not published a readout of the call but U.S. media mention it : After @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it would continue to attack the Taliban : The Taliban do not have any obligations to stop fighting the Afghan government .
The U.S. agreement with them does not include any such clause .
The general announced that the U.S. would continue its air support for Afghan government forces and demanded that the Taliban `` lower their violence . ''
That is not what the Taliban expected from the deal that was signed .
From their point of view a ceasefire with the Afghan government is still far away and they have no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ They will now likely escalate with attacks against the foreign troops in their country .
There were rumors that the U.S. agreement with the Taliban has four secret annexes which would allow for U.S. troops to stay in the country .
Rumors in Afghanistan also say that the U.S. intends to let the Taliban take power and to then use them for its purpose against Iran , Pakistan and in Central Asia .
This is a rare case in which I believe Pompeo .
The Taliban would not stick to any side deal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ capable with regards to the main deal .
If there were any side deals of any importance the U.S. would not disregard the just signed agreement as blatantly as it does now .
Trump does not care about any of the above .
He needed the agreement to justify a draw down of U.S. troops in Afghanistan .
He will use that draw down to claim that he kept his 2016 election promise to get U.S. troops out of Afghanistan .
This even when there will actually still be the same number of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his inauguration .
Spring is coming and with it the campaign season of the Taliban .
With the agreement with the Taliban breached the U.S. is likely to lose more soldiers .
To be not-agreement capable tends to have a high price .

Today a U.S. fighter jet bombed a Taliban unit which was fighting with an Afghan government checkpoint.
The air attack came just a day after U.S. President Trump had a telephone call with the Taliban leaders in Doha. The Taliban will likely see this as a breach of the recent ceasefire agreement between the U.S. and the Taliban.
The Russian Presidential Envoy for Afghanistan Zamir Kabulov supports that view:
"This is a treaty violation, because both the US and the Taliban entered into legally binding commitments not to attack. The Taliban did not attack the Americans or other foreign forces. If the US did that, they violated the agreement blatantly," the diplomat pointed out.
The Russians have called the U.S. "nedogovorosposobny" (недоговороспособны) which translate to "not-agreement capable" or unable to make and then abide by an agreement.
Today's attack again demonstrated that.
On Saturday, February 29, the U.S. Special Representative for Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad and a commission of high ranking Taliban signed the Agreement for Bringing Peace to Afghanistan between the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan which is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban and the United States of America (pdf). (Yes, that is the real title.)
The Taliban were quite happy with the agreement:
Dozens of Taliban members had earlier held a small victory march in Qatar in which they waved the militant group’s white flags, according to a video shared on Taliban websites. “Today is the day of victory, which has come with the help of Allah,” said Abbas Stanikzai, one of the Taliban’s lead negotiators, who joined the march.
Shortly thereafter Stanikzai was seen shaking hands with Secretary of State Pompeo.
We got a copy of the only known photo of Sec Pompeo shaking hands w top #Taliban negotiator Stanekzai — here it is #Doha. US told #Qatar to keep him away from insurgents to avoid photo ops. Jessica Donati @jessdonati - 18:30 UTC · Mar 3, 2020 We got a copy of the only known photo of Sec Pompeo shaking hands w top #Taliban negotiator Stanekzai — here it is #Doha. US told #Qatar to keep him away from insurgents to avoid photo ops.
At the same time the Doha agreement was signed, U.S. Defense Secretary Esper and NATO General Secretary Stoltenberg were in Kabul and signed a Joint Declaration between the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and the United States of America for Bringing Peace to Afghanistan (pdf).
Neither the U.S. agreement with the Taliban nor the joint declaration with the Afghan government constitute a ceasefire between Afghan government and the Taliban. Both agreements are designed to facilitate upcoming direct ceasefire negotiations between the Afghan government and the Taliban.
The joint declaration includes somewhat vague commitments of further military and economic support for the government in Kabul and its troops. But it noticeably does not include any commitment to use force in support of Afghan government operations against the Taliban. The relevant passage says in Part One Point 2 and 3:
support to Afghan security forces to prevent al-Qa’ida, ISIS-K, and other international terrorist groups or individuals from using Afghan soil to threaten the United States and its allies. The United States re-affirms its commitments regarding support for the Afghan security forces and other government institutions, including through ongoing efforts to enhance the ability of Afghan security forces to deter and respond to internal and external threats, consistent with its commitments under existing security agreements between the two governments. This commitment includesfrom using Afghan soil to threaten the United States and its allies. The United States re-affirms its readiness to continue to conduct military operations in Afghanistan with the consent of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan in order to disrupt and degrade efforts by al-Qa’ida, ISIS-K, and other international terrorist groups or individuals to carry out attacks against the United States or its allies, consistent with its commitments under existing security agreements between the two governments and with the existing understanding that U.S. counterterrorism operations are intended to complement and support Afghan security forces’ counterterrorism operations, with full respect for Afghan sovereignty and full regard for the safety and security of the Afghan people and the protection of civilians.
While listing al-Qaeda, ISIS and "international terrorist groups" the U.S. intentionally left out attacks by the Taliban.
Part One Point F of the U.S. agreement with the Taliban says:
The United States and its allies will refrain from the threat or the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Afghanistan or intervening in its domestic affairs.
The fight between the Afghan Taliban and Afghan government forces is certainly a 'domestic affair'. Under this agreement the U.S. had no right to intervene in it.
Those who defend today's U.S. attack on the Taliban will argue that the Taliban broke the agreement by attacking a "U.S. ally". The U.S. agreement with the Taliban says under Part Two Point 1:
The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan which is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban will not allow any of its members, other individuals or groups, including al-Qa’ida, to use the soil of Afghanistan to threaten the security of the United States and its allies.
The strategic Agreement Between the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and AFGHANISTAN (pdf) signed at Kabul May 2, 2012 designates Afghanistan as a "Major Non-NATO Ally" of the United States. The argument is thus that Taliban attacks on Afghan government forces are attacks on a U.S. ally from which the Taliban should refrain.
Still my legal reading is that the more recent U.S. agreement with the Taliban as well as the joint statement with the Afghan government supersede that with regards to inner Afghan fighting which is clearly a 'domestic affair'.
That the U.S. is not an honest partner is also visible in other parts of its recent Afghanistan agreements.
Part One C of the U.S. agreement with the Taliban says:
The United States is committed to start immediately to work with all relevant sides on a plan to expeditiously release combat and political prisoners as a confidence building measure with the coordination and approval of all relevant sides. Up to five thousand (5,000) prisoners of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan which is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban and up to one thousand (1,000) prisoners of the other side will be released by March 10, 2020, [...]. The United States commits to completing this goal.
The interesting point is that the 5.000 prisoners are actually prisoners of the Afghan government. That the U.S. committed itself to release prisoners it has no direct control over is quite curious.
It is also contradicted by the joint declaration with the Afghan government which was signed at the same time. Part Two Point 4 of it says:
To create the conditions for reaching a political settlement and achieving a permanent, sustainable ceasefire, the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan will participate in a U.S.-facilitated discussion with Taliban representatives on confidence building measures, to include determining the feasibility of releasing significant numbers of prisoners on both sides.
A vague Afghan government commitment to "participate in discussions" about prisoner exchange seems to contradict the strong promise with a fixed date the U.S. made in the agreement with the Taliban.
When the U.S.government signs two agreements with different parties which contradict each other on the very same day it is clearly not-agreement capable.
Why should the Afghan government now agree to a prisoner exchange which would clearly favor the Taliban?
The sitting president of Afghanistan Ashraf Ghani immediately made the point:
The US-Taliban agreement, which sets into motion the potential of a full withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan, calls for the release of 5,000 Taliban prisoners.
“We have not made a commitment,” Afghan President says. “It’s a sovereign Afghan decision." He told @CNN Pajhwok Afghan News @pajhwok - 4:27 UTC · Mar 2, 2020 The US-Taliban agreement, which sets into motion the potential of a full withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan, calls for the release of 5,000 Taliban prisoners.“We have not made a commitment,” Afghan President says. “It’s a sovereign Afghan decision." He told @CNN
The Taliban demand the prisoner release before they will sit down with the Afghan government for ceasefire negotiations.
Ghani is currently fighting with Afghan government's Chief Executive Abdullah Abdullah over who of them won the botched election in Afghanistan. The U.S. has yet to accept one of them as the newly elected president. Ghani will sabotage the prisoner release until Trump officially recognizes him as the newly elected president of Afghanistan.
The Taliban will press the U.S. to stand to its agreement and to press Ghani to release their friends. As long as that is not happening they will continue to fight:
A Taliban letter shared Monday with Stars and Stripes by a person with links to the militant group called on fighters to attack Afghan forces, but not U.S. or foreign forces. “After signing the agreement, once again the Mujahedeen (fighters) of the Islamic Emirate are advised to start their attacks against the puppet Kabul administration,” said the Taliban letter, which the person provided on condition of anonymity.
...
Top officials at the Pentagon on Monday indicated they were not surprised the Taliban would return to attacking Afghan forces, but they called on the group to gradually reduce violence across Afghanistan as measures in the new agreement are implemented.
...
“This is going to be a long, winding, bumpy road,” Esper told reporters. “There will be ups and downs. We’ll stop and start. That’s going to be the nature of this over the next days, weeks and months.”
Yesterday Trump had a 35 minutes phone call with the deputy leader of the Taliban peace commission in Doha Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar. The Taliban emphasized that the U.S. must stick to its agreement. The Taliban readout of the call includes this exchange:
Mullah Baradar said: "Mr. President!" "Take determined actions in regards to the withdrawal of foreign forces from Afghanistan and do not allow anyone to take actions that violate the terms of the agreement thus embroiling you even further in this prolonged war."
...
The President of the United States Donal Trump said: "It is a pleasure to talk to you. You are a tough people and have a great country and I understand that you are fighting for your homeland. We have been there for 19 years and that is a very long time and withdrawal of foreign forces from Afghanistan now is in the interest of everyone." President Trump added: "My Secretary of State shall soon talk with Ashraf Ghani in order to remove all hurdles facing the intra-Afghan negotiations." He said that we shall take complete part in the future rehabilitation of Afghanistan. Extensive discussions were also held about the implementation of the agreement concluded by both sides.
The White House has not published a readout of the call but U.S. media mention it:
Afterward, he told reporters that his "relationship" with Baradar is "very good ... we had a good, long conversation today, and, you know, they want to cease the violence. They'd like to cease violence also." That's not true. On Monday, the group's spokesperson said attacks would resume on Afghan government forces but not U.S. forces, and Monday into Tuesday, there were 33 attacks in 16 provinces, killing six people and wounding 14, an Afghan Interior Ministry spokesperson told ABC News. Five Afghan policemen also were reportedly killed during an attack on a security checkpoint, according to Reuters.
After the call the U.S. military announced that it would continue to attack the Taliban:
Video [English]: US Gen. Miller in exclusive intw with TOLOnews on Tues. says US will defend Afghan forces, situation is "fragile," reduction of violence is the objective, if Taliban don't live up to obligations US will respond. #Afghanistan TOLOnews @TOLOnews - 8:38 AM · Mar 4, 2020 Video [English]: US Gen. Miller in exclusive intw with TOLOnews on Tues. says US will defend Afghan forces, situation is "fragile," reduction of violence is the objective, if Taliban don't live up to obligations US will respond. #Afghanistan
The Taliban do not have any obligations to stop fighting the Afghan government. The U.S. agreement with them does not include any such clause.
The general announced that the U.S. would continue its air support for Afghan government forces and demanded that the Taliban "lower their violence."
That is not what the Taliban expected from the deal that was signed. From their point of view a ceasefire with the Afghan government is still far away and they have no obligations to put their weapons down. They will now likely escalate with attacks against the foreign troops in their country.
There were rumors that the U.S. agreement with the Taliban has four secret annexes which would allow for U.S. troops to stay in the country. Rumors in Afghanistan also say that the U.S. intends to let the Taliban take power and to then use them for its purpose against Iran, Pakistan and in Central Asia.
Secretary of State Pompeo denied such side deals:
The US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Sunday in an interview on CBS News' Face the Nation said that along with the public document of the US-Taliban deal released on Saturday, “there are two implementing elements that will be provided. They are secret.” “They are military implementation documents that are important to protect our soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines,” Pompeo said. “They're classified, secret. There aren't any side deals.
This is a rare case in which I believe Pompeo. The Taliban would not stick to any side deal after the U.S. proved to be not-agreement capable with regards to the main deal. If there were any side deals of any importance the U.S. would not disregard the just signed agreement as blatantly as it does now.
Trump does not care about any of the above. He needed the agreement to justify a draw down of U.S. troops in Afghanistan. He will use that draw down to claim that he kept his 2016 election promise to get U.S. troops out of Afghanistan. This even when there will actually still be the same number of troops in Afghanistan as there were during his inauguration.
Spring is coming and with it the campaign season of the Taliban. With the agreement with the Taliban breached the U.S. is likely to lose more soldiers. To be not-agreement capable tends to have a high price.


russiainsider--2020-03-05--The Taliban ‘Peace Deal’ Is Very Vague, the US Wants a Permanent Presence in Afghanistan

As far as realpolitik Afghanistan is concerned , with or without a deal , the US military want to stay in what is a priceless Greater Middle East base to deploy hybrid war techniques Nearly two decades after the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan post-9/11 , and after an interminable war costing over $ 2 trillion , there ’ s hardly anything “ historic ” about a possible peace deal that may be signed in Doha this coming Saturday between Washington and the Taliban .
We should start by stressing three points .
1- The Taliban wanted all US troops @ @ @ @ @ @ @ possible deal only reduces US troops from 13,000 to 8,600 .
That ’ s the same number already deployed before the Trump administration .
3- The reduction will only happen a year and a half from now – assuming what ’ s being described as a truce holds .
So there would be no misunderstanding , Taliban Deputy Leader Sirajuddin Haqqani , in an op-ed certainly read by everyone inside the Beltway , detailed their straightforward red line : total US withdrawal .
And Haqqani is adamant : there ’ s no peace @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a deal looms .
How come ?
Simple : enter a series of secret “ annexes.
” The top US negotiator , the seemingly eternal Zalmay Khalilzad , a remnant of the Clinton and Bush eras , has spent months codifying these annexes – as confirmed by a source in Kabul currently not in government but familiar with the negotiations .
Let ’ s break them down to four points .
1- US counter-terror forces would be allowed to stay .
Even if approved by the Taliban leadership , this would be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
2- The Taliban would have to denounce terrorism and violent extremism .
That ’ s rhetorical , not a problem .
3- There will be a scheme to monitor the so-called truce while different warring Afghan factions discuss the future , what the US State Dept .
describes as “ intra-Afghan negotiations.
” Culturally , as we ’ ll see later , Afghans of different ethnic backgrounds will have a tremendously hard time monitoring their own warring .
4- The CIA would be allowed to do business in Taliban-controlled areas .
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Everyone familiar with post-9/11 Afghanistan knows that the prime reason for CIA business is the heroin rat line that finances Langley ’ s black ops , as I exposed in 2017 .
Otherwise , everything about this “ historic ” deal remains quite vague .
Even Secretary of Defense Mark Esper was forced to admit the war in Afghanistan is “ still ” in “ a state of strategic stalemate.
” As for the far from strategic financial disaster , one just needs to peruse the latest SIGAR report .
SIGAR stands @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In fact virtually nothing in Afghanistan has been “ reconstructed.
” The “ intra-Afghan ” mess starts with the fact that Ashraf Ghani eventually was declared the winner of the presidential elections held in September last year .
But virtually no one recognizes him .
The Taliban don ’ t talk to Ghani .
Only to some people that are part of the government in Kabul .
And they describe these talks at best as between “ ordinary Afghans.
” Everyone familiar with Taliban strategy knows US/NATO troops will never be allowed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Taliban allowing some sort of face-saving contingent to remain for a few months , and then a very small contingent stays to protect the US embassy in Kabul .
Washington will obviously reject this possibility .
The alleged “ truce ” will be broken .
Trump , pressured by the Pentagon , will send more troops .
And the infernal spiral will be back on track .
Another major hole in the possible deal is that the Americans completely ignored Iran in their negotiations in Doha .
That ’ s patently absurd @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to its neighbor Kabul .
Apart from the millenary historical/cultural/social connections , there are at least 3.5 million Afghan refugees in Iran .
Post 9-11 , Tehran slowly but surely started cultivating relations with the Taliban – but not at a military/weaponizing level , according to Iranian diplomats .
In Beirut last September , and then in Nur-Sultan in November , I was provided a clear picture of where discussions about Afghanistan stand .
The Russian connection to the Taliban goes through Tehran .
Taliban leaders have frequent contacts with the Islamic Revolutionary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Russia held two conferences in Moscow between Taliban political leaders and mujahideen .
The Russians were engaged into bringing Uzbeks into the negotiations .
At the same time , some Taliban leaders met with Russian Federal Security Service ( FSB ) operatives four times in Tehran , in secret .
The gist of all these discussions was “ to find a conflict resolution outside of Western patterns ” , according to an Iranian diplomat .
They were aiming at some sort of federalism : the Taliban plus the mujahideen in charge of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ line is that Iran has better connections in Afghanistan than Russia and China .
And this all plays within the much larger scope of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization .
The Russia-China strategic partnership wants an Afghan solution coming from inside the SCO , of which both Iran and Afghanistan are observers .
Iran may become a full SCO member if it holds on to the nuclear deal , the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action , until October – thus still not subjected to UN sanctions .
All these actors want US troops out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ always points towards a decentralized federation .
According to an Afghan diplomat , the Taliban seem ready to share power with the Northern Alliance .
The spanner in the works is the Hezb-e-Islami , with one Jome Khan Hamdard , a commander allied with notorious mujahid Gulbudiin Hekmatyar , based in Mazar-i-Sharif and supported by Saudi Arabia and Pakistan , more interested in restarting a civil war .
Here ’ s a blast from the past , reliving the context of the Taliban visit to Houston , and showing how things have not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It ’ s always a matter of the Taliban getting their cut – at the time related to Pipelineistan business , now to their reaffirmation of what can be described as Pashtunistan .
Not every Pashtun is a Taliban , but the overwhelming majority of Taliban are Pashtuns .
The Washington establishment never did their “ know your enemy ” homework , trying to understand how Pashtuns from extremely diverse groups are linked by a common system of values establishing their ethnic foundation and necessary social rules .
That ’ s the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the fascinating , complex Pashtunwali .
Although it incorporates numerous Islamic elements , Pashtunwali is in total contradiction with Islamic law on many points .
Islam did introduce key moral elements to Pashtun society .
But there are also juridical norms , imposed by a hereditary nobility , that support the whole edifice and that came from the Turko-Mongols .
Pashtuns – a tribal society – have a deep aversion to the Western concept of the state .
Central power can only expect to neutralize them with – to put it bluntly – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a sort of system of government in Afghanistan .
Which brings the question of how much – and with what – the US is now bribing the Taliban .
Afghan political life , in practice , works out from actors that are factions , sub-tribes , “ Islamic coalitions ” or regional groups .
Since 1996 , and up to 9/11 , the Taliban incarnated the legitimate return of Pashtuns as the dominant element in Afghanistan .
That ’ s why they instituted an emirate and not a republic , more appropriate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ religious legislation .
The diffidence towards cities , particularly Kabul , also expresses the sentiment of Pashtun superiority over other Afghan ethnic groups .
The Taliban do represent a process of overcoming tribal identity and the affirmation of Pashtunistan .
The Beltway never understood this powerful dynamic – and that ’ s one of the key reasons for the American debacle .
Afghanistan is at the center of the new American strategy for Central Asia , as in “ expand and maintain support for stability in Afghanistan ” coupled with an emphasis to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Afghanistan.
” In practice , the Trump administration wants the five Central Asian “ stans ” to bet on integration projects such as the CASA-1000 electricity project and the Lapis Lazuli trade corridor , which is in fact a reboot of the Ancient Silk Road , connecting Afghanistan to Turkmenistan , Azerbaijan and Georgia before crossing the Black Sea to Turkey and then all the way to the EU .
But the thing is Lapis Lazuli is already bound to integrate with Turkey ’ s Middle Corridor , which is part of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Road Initiative , as well as with the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor Plus , also part of Belt and Road .
Beijing planned this integration way before Washington .
The Trump administration is just stressing the obvious : a peaceful Afghanistan is essential for the integration process .
Andrew Korybko correctly argues that “ Russia and China could make more progress on building the Golden Ring between themselves , Pakistan , Iran , and Turkey by that time , thus ‘ embracing ’ Central Asia with potentially limitless opportunities that far surpass those that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ the region from a zero-sum American strategic perspective and ‘ forcing ’ it out.
” The late Zbigniew “ Grand Chessboard ” Brzezinski ’ s wishful thinking “ Eurasian Balkans ” scenario may be dead , but the myriad US divide-and-rule gambits imposed on the heartland have now mutated into hybrid war explicitly directed against China , Russia and Iran – the three major nodes of Eurasia integration .
And that means that as far as realpolitik Afghanistan is concerned , with or without a deal , the US military have no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to stay – whatever it takes .
Afghanistan is a priceless Greater Middle East base to deploy hybrid war techniques .
Pashtuns are certainly getting the message from key Shanghai Cooperation Organization players .
The question is how they plan to run rings around Team Trump .

As far as realpolitik Afghanistan is concerned, with or without a deal, the US military want to stay in what is a priceless Greater Middle East base to deploy hybrid war techniques
In this photo taken on February 21, youths and peace activists gather as they celebrate the reduction in violence, in Kandahar. A week-long partial truce took hold across Afghanistan on February 22, with some jubilant civilians dancing in the streets as the war-weary country prepared for this coming Saturday's planned agreement on a peace deal between the Taliban and the United States. Photo: AFP / Javed Tanveer
Nearly two decades after the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan post-9/11, and after an interminable war costing over $ 2 trillion, there’s hardly anything “historic” about a possible peace deal that may be signed in Doha this coming Saturday between Washington and the Taliban.
We should start by stressing three points.
1- The Taliban wanted all US troops out. Washington refused.
2- The possible deal only reduces US troops from 13,000 to 8,600. That’s the same number already deployed before the Trump administration.
3- The reduction will only happen a year and a half from now – assuming what’s being described as a truce holds.
So there would be no misunderstanding, Taliban Deputy Leader Sirajuddin Haqqani, in an op-ed certainly read by everyone inside the Beltway, detailed their straightforward red line: total US withdrawal.
And Haqqani is adamant: there’s no peace deal if US troops stay.
Still, a deal looms. How come? Simple: enter a series of secret “annexes.”
The top US negotiator, the seemingly eternal Zalmay Khalilzad, a remnant of the Clinton and Bush eras, has spent months codifying these annexes – as confirmed by a source in Kabul currently not in government but familiar with the negotiations.
Let’s break them down to four points.
1- US counter-terror forces would be allowed to stay. Even if approved by the Taliban leadership, this would be anathema to the masses of Taliban fighters.
2- The Taliban would have to denounce terrorism and violent extremism. That’s rhetorical, not a problem.
3- There will be a scheme to monitor the so-called truce while different warring Afghan factions discuss the future, what the US State Dept. describes as “intra-Afghan negotiations.” Culturally, as we’ll see later, Afghans of different ethnic backgrounds will have a tremendously hard time monitoring their own warring.
4- The CIA would be allowed to do business in Taliban-controlled areas. That’s an even more hardcore anathema. Everyone familiar with post-9/11 Afghanistan knows that the prime reason for CIA business is the heroin rat line that finances Langley’s black ops, as I exposed in 2017.
Otherwise, everything about this “historic” deal remains quite vague.
Even Secretary of Defense Mark Esper was forced to admit the war in Afghanistan is “still” in “a state of strategic stalemate.”
As for the far from strategic financial disaster, one just needs to peruse the latest SIGAR report. SIGAR stands for Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction. In fact virtually nothing in Afghanistan has been “reconstructed.”
No real deal without Iran
The “intra-Afghan” mess starts with the fact that Ashraf Ghani eventually was declared the winner of the presidential elections held in September last year. But virtually no one recognizes him.
The Taliban don’t talk to Ghani. Only to some people that are part of the government in Kabul. And they describe these talks at best as between “ordinary Afghans.”
Everyone familiar with Taliban strategy knows US/NATO troops will never be allowed to stay. What could happen is the Taliban allowing some sort of face-saving contingent to remain for a few months, and then a very small contingent stays to protect the US embassy in Kabul.
Washington will obviously reject this possibility. The alleged “truce” will be broken. Trump, pressured by the Pentagon, will send more troops. And the infernal spiral will be back on track.
Another major hole in the possible deal is that the Americans completely ignored Iran in their negotiations in Doha.
That’s patently absurd. Teheran is a key strategic partner to its neighbor Kabul. Apart from the millenary historical/cultural/social connections, there are at least 3.5 million Afghan refugees in Iran.
Post 9-11, Tehran slowly but surely started cultivating relations with the Taliban – but not at a military/weaponizing level, according to Iranian diplomats. In Beirut last September, and then in Nur-Sultan in November, I was provided a clear picture of where discussions about Afghanistan stand.
The Russian connection to the Taliban goes through Tehran. Taliban leaders have frequent contacts with the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. Only last year, Russia held two conferences in Moscow between Taliban political leaders and mujahideen. The Russians were engaged into bringing Uzbeks into the negotiations. At the same time, some Taliban leaders met with Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) operatives four times in Tehran, in secret.
The gist of all these discussions was “to find a conflict resolution outside of Western patterns”, according to an Iranian diplomat. They were aiming at some sort of federalism: the Taliban plus the mujahideen in charge of the administration of some vilayets.
The bottom line is that Iran has better connections in Afghanistan than Russia and China. And this all plays within the much larger scope of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. The Russia-China strategic partnership wants an Afghan solution coming from inside the SCO, of which both Iran and Afghanistan are observers. Iran may become a full SCO member if it holds on to the nuclear deal, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, until October – thus still not subjected to UN sanctions.
All these actors want US troops out – for good. So the solution always points towards a decentralized federation. According to an Afghan diplomat, the Taliban seem ready to share power with the Northern Alliance. The spanner in the works is the Hezb-e-Islami, with one Jome Khan Hamdard, a commander allied with notorious mujahid Gulbudiin Hekmatyar, based in Mazar-i-Sharif and supported by Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, more interested in restarting a civil war.
Understanding Pashtunistan
Here’s a blast from the past, reliving the context of the Taliban visit to Houston, and showing how things have not changed much since the first Clinton administration. It’s always a matter of the Taliban getting their cut – at the time related to Pipelineistan business, now to their reaffirmation of what can be described as Pashtunistan.
Not every Pashtun is a Taliban, but the overwhelming majority of Taliban are Pashtuns.
The Washington establishment never did their “know your enemy” homework, trying to understand how Pashtuns from extremely diverse groups are linked by a common system of values establishing their ethnic foundation and necessary social rules. That’s the essence of their code of conduct – the fascinating, complex Pashtunwali. Although it incorporates numerous Islamic elements, Pashtunwali is in total contradiction with Islamic law on many points.
Islam did introduce key moral elements to Pashtun society. But there are also juridical norms, imposed by a hereditary nobility, that support the whole edifice and that came from the Turko-Mongols.
Pashtuns – a tribal society – have a deep aversion to the Western concept of the state. Central power can only expect to neutralize them with – to put it bluntly – bribes. That’s what passes as a sort of system of government in Afghanistan. Which brings the question of how much – and with what – the US is now bribing the Taliban.
Afghan political life, in practice, works out from actors that are factions, sub-tribes, “Islamic coalitions” or regional groups.
Since 1996, and up to 9/11, the Taliban incarnated the legitimate return of Pashtuns as the dominant element in Afghanistan. That’s why they instituted an emirate and not a republic, more appropriate for a Muslim community ruled only by religious legislation. The diffidence towards cities, particularly Kabul, also expresses the sentiment of Pashtun superiority over other Afghan ethnic groups.
The Taliban do represent a process of overcoming tribal identity and the affirmation of Pashtunistan. The Beltway never understood this powerful dynamic – and that’s one of the key reasons for the American debacle.
Lapis Lazuli corridor
Afghanistan is at the center of the new American strategy for Central Asia, as in “expand and maintain support for stability in Afghanistan” coupled with an emphasis to “encourage connectivity between Central Asia and Afghanistan.”
In practice, the Trump administration wants the five Central Asian “stans” to bet on integration projects such as the CASA-1000 electricity project and the Lapis Lazuli trade corridor, which is in fact a reboot of the Ancient Silk Road, connecting Afghanistan to Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan and Georgia before crossing the Black Sea to Turkey and then all the way to the EU.
But the thing is Lapis Lazuli is already bound to integrate with Turkey’s Middle Corridor, which is part of the New Silk Roads, or Belt and Road Initiative, as well as with the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor Plus, also part of Belt and Road. Beijing planned this integration way before Washington.
The Trump administration is just stressing the obvious: a peaceful Afghanistan is essential for the integration process.
Andrew Korybko correctly argues that “Russia and China could make more progress on building the Golden Ring between themselves, Pakistan, Iran, and Turkey by that time, thus ‘embracing’ Central Asia with potentially limitless opportunities that far surpass those that the US is offering or ‘encircling’ the region from a zero-sum American strategic perspective and ‘forcing’ it out.”
The late Zbigniew “Grand Chessboard” Brzezinski’s wishful thinking “Eurasian Balkans” scenario may be dead, but the myriad US divide-and-rule gambits imposed on the heartland have now mutated into hybrid war explicitly directed against China, Russia and Iran – the three major nodes of Eurasia integration.
And that means that as far as realpolitik Afghanistan is concerned, with or without a deal, the US military have no intention to go anywhere. They want to stay – whatever it takes. Afghanistan is a priceless Greater Middle East base to deploy hybrid war techniques.
Pashtuns are certainly getting the message from key Shanghai Cooperation Organization players. The question is how they plan to run rings around Team Trump.