southfront--2020-10-22--A Return to Containment: Kennan and the Responsible Use of Power – Part 2

THE FIRST PART CAN BE FOUND HERE I begin Part 2 with a bit of history about America ’ s journey from isolationism to ‘ leader of the free world ’ following the defeat of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan .
The surprise Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor that thrust the US into WW2 taught America that neutrality and an insular foreign policy focused on the Western Hemisphere was no longer realistic policy – belligerents on the other side of the world could and would bring violence to America ’ s neutral shores .
The Truman Doctrine ( 1947 ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US global leadership in defending the free world from the spread of communism and containing an expansionist Soviet Union – this was George Kennan ’ s Policy of Containment .
To avoid a future global war , policy was to contain the Soviet Union to its existing sphere to allow time for the internal contradictions of communist ideology to cause rot from within , resulting in eventual collapse – this was Kennan ’ s concept of strategic patience .
But why should the American people support such a far-reaching doctrine in the first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ win public support by appealing to American values and tapping into American exceptionalism – America was destined to lead the world .
Truman was successful in getting public buy-in of his doctrine by wedding Containment with Wilsonian idealism and American values of liberty , equality , freedom of the press , rule of law , pursuit of happiness .
In opposition was an ideology that threatened everything Americans held dear and this proved highly effective in mobilizing public support for policies that represented nothing less than a stunning about face for a traditionally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the Cold War ; an epic ideological struggle between superpowers , a contest that would be determined by who had the superior ideology .
Eventually it was the Soviet Union that collapsed , leaving a triumphant US and her allies to extoll the superiority ( now validated ) of liberal Western ideology .
This perception of ideological superiority over communism remains true to this very day .
How else would public opinion be so quickly and uniformly turned against the Chinese Communist Party ( CCP ) in a matter of 2 to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ less successful decade long media campaign to demonize Russia and Putin .
LINK ; LINK Russia and evil dictator Putin bashing is propaganda , so is China bashing , but there is a difference , the public sees far more truth regarding China compared to Russia/Putin .
Those living in a democracy can at least relate with media reporting on Russia such as reporting a drop in poll numbers revealing cracks in Putin ’ s popularity among Russians .
Those living in democracies can identify with this , being constantly bombarded with polling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ democracy .
During the Cold War , the Soviet Union was impenetrable other than what was strictly controlled by the communist party – a closed mysterious society ruled by a totalitarian regime .
Today , Russia is nothing like the closed repressed society of the former Soviet Union .
In contrast , the CCP has many similarities with the Soviet Union – one-party authoritarian rule , intolerant of dissent – there is no polling , no free press and heavy-handed government control of any information coming in or out of China – basically @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first Cold War was first and foremost a struggle between competing ideologies – democracy , open society and free markets ( capitalism ) versus communist authoritarianism , closed society and centralized command economy .
If the US is entering into a New Cold War , I expect it to be much like the first Cold War , a war of ideologies – and who steps into the old Cold War rivals shoes the best ?
In a nutshell , China works best as a New Cold War rival because it is much harder @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more like us compared to the CCP , who are clearly more like ‘ them ’ , the former Soviet Union .
While there are other factors that make China the more suitable candidate for Cold War rival , the role of ideology is crucial to understand .
A Tale of Two Ideologies or will it be a Tale of One Ideology Given the similarities of the CCP and the communist party that ruled the Soviet Union , the US and her new ‘ Pacific NATO ’ allies can act to contain the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ waiting for the CCP to collapse under the weight of its flawed ideology – strategic patience for the 21st century : The author Robert Kaplan believes Washington can win if patient , which takes a page right out of the book of the first Cold War – Kennan advocated strategic patience because he believed the superiority of Western ideology would win out .
And in an earlier article published in the Atlantic , Kaplan left little to the imagination regarding US-China rivalry : “ a replay of the decades-long Cold War , with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heart of Europe but , rather , among Pacific atolls.
” LINK This of course assumes the US does not abandon its ideology , for example , becoming an authoritarian state .
Prior to 9-11 , the possibility of a US dictatorship did not cross my mind .
Recently and particularly in our current year from hell , I am amazed by the media hysteria over possible dictatorship , civil war , revolution , an evil Trump coup-de-tat or what I think to be most likely , a takeover of the White House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ live in Canada and was born Canadian , but I grew up in the US and so for me , there is this strong connection with America .
I remember grade school standing outside for the morning raising of the stars and stripes with right hand over one ’ s heart to pledge allegiance .
I had no need to look up the wording on the Internet , I remember the words I and my fellow classmates spoke almost 50 years ago : Now I see a nation divided by a polarising media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the most contentious presidential elections in history .
But there have been contentious elections in the past and I think the media are intentionally stoking division .
Taken from a June 2020 NBC News article authored by Jeff McCausland , retired U.S. Army colonel and former member of the NSC : This and statements by retired General Mattis and other former military officials is highly extraordinary : “ For senior retired military officers to level such criticism against a serving president is unprecedented and signals a true constitutional crisis over American civil-military relations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff , General Mark Milley , effectively doused the inflammatory rhetoric – but not without one more grasping at straws attempt to politicise General Milley ’ s statements .
On Aug. 28 , 2020 , Forbes published an article titled : “ Top U.S. General Promises Military Will Stay Out Of The Election Process ” LINK , but then the article begins : The ‘ pledge ’ by General Milley is what he would say regardless of who has what fears or who is in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Biden , Obama , Bush or Darth Vader .
General Milley was right to put to rest rampant speculation of military involvement in the upcoming November election : If for some reason the Republic falls , and the US becomes a dictatorship , the US will be no different from the CCP and the New Cold War will no longer be about two opposing ideologies , it will become a tale of two nations and one ideology – the CCP ’ s ideology .
But I highly doubt this is around the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I will return to this later .
What follows is a discussion of the historical evolution of US foreign policy and the role of ideology .
President Woodrow Wilson ’ s 14 points was a response to the unprecedented destruction of WW1 which the great power alliances of Europe were suppose to prevent .
Wilson ’ s proposed League of Nations was an early effort towards global cooperation as an alternative to grand alliances in preventing war .
LINK Wilson advocated that the victors show leniency towards the vanquished central powers as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just peace ” to avert laying the foundation for a future war , but the “ European leaders were not interested in a just peace .
They were interested in retribution ” .
LINK The importance of the punitive Versailles Treaty in Hitler ’ s rise to power is well documented in : William Shirer , The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich : A History of Nazi Germany , ; latest edition 2011 .
If Germany had been offered a ‘ just peace ’ as advocated by Wilson , it would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ major election promises that propelled him to power – he would rip up the Versailles Treaty and restore Germany ’ s dignity .
An unjust peace creates the conditions for future war while a just peace could prevent such a conflict – this is the core principle of cooperative security ; “ Cooperative security thus displaces the centerpiece of security planning from preparing to counter threats to preventing such threats from arising ” – Carter A. , Perry W. , Steinbrunner J.D .
( 1992 ) ; , Washington D.C. p. 7 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ wars were visionary and would influence Kennan ’ s thinking in shaping his Policy of Containment which would guide US foreign policy during the Cold War .
Wilson ’ s proposals to prevent war were a part of his idealistic 14 points inspired by the Enlightenment Movement : Wilson ’ s January 8 , 1918 address to Congress articulated his 14 points ( LINK ) that called for a more internationalist US role to ensure : Wilson ’ s assertion that international stability had a direct bearing on America ’ s own security @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the United States refused to take part in the League of Nations .
Isolationists in Congress feared it would draw the United States into international affairs unnecessarily ” LINK .
Although hundreds of American lives were lost due to unrestricted German submarine warfare , pulling the US into WW1 , the American public had no appetite for further entanglement in European affairs , preferring a return to isolationism .
World War II and the End of the Golden Age of American Isolationism Kennan ’ s Containment Policy , predicated on the long view @ @ @ @ @ @ @ war , would necessitate pulling the US out of her isolationists shell .
When Truman made the decision to adopt Kennan ’ s Policy of Containment , he realised that if communism is to be actively contained , the US must be prepared to intervene in places far from America ’ s shores , representing a significant reorientation of US foreign policy .
The isolationist movement in the US could have frustrated Truman ’ s post-WW2 internationalist vision , just as the movement had frustrated President Wilson ’ s post-WW1 vision .
When @ @ @ @ @ @ @ neutrality due to a strong campaign against involvement such as the ‘ America First Committee ’ ( AFC ) led by prominent isolationists such as Charles Lindbergh .
LINK But the arguments for maintaining US neutrality were to be swept away in a single day when on December 7 , 1941 , the Japanese attacked without warning the US naval base at Pearl Harbor , causing immense carnage with thousands of American lives lost .
The surprise attack came as a total shock that jolted even staunch isolationists likes Lindbergh , and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of WW2 : From Isolationism to Leader of the Free World Global US leadership was an entirely new experience for Americans as was maintaining an armaments industry to meet the needs of the military to maintain deterrence to keep the Soviets in check .
The face-off between the US and the Soviet Union would go on for 40+ years – a period of superpower rivalry that would justify a powerful US military in order to deter a powerful Soviet military .
Such a rivalry would seem dangerous , and to an extent it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ guided by Containment with its purpose to prevent nuclear war while at the same time containing Soviet expansionism .
The policy was endorsed by the military given that the need to contain Soviet expansion justified large military budgets to preserve a stable international system ; war without war , a ‘ Cold War ’ .
And a large budget was an understatement as US military spending nearly equaled the military spending of all other nations combined .
What justified such extravagance was the US assuming the role of global defender of Democracy and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world .
As such , the US could find itself fighting simultaneous conflicts to contain communism all over the world , and this would need a big , big budget .
And Truman , a dedicated Wilsonian , proved masterful in convincing the American public , by appealing to American values , to support his new internationalist policy – the Truman Doctrine .
On March 12 , 1947 , Truman stood before Congress to lay out his grand vision of a new foreign policy premised on the need for the US to assume @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leaders and the American public applauded Truman ’ s vision with a spike in Truman ’ s approval rating rising from 48 % to 63 % .
LINK The timing of Truman ’ s speech was just right – the trauma of Pearl Harbor dealt a death blow to the isolationist movement as Americans came to the realisation that Wilson was correct , neutrality could not shield a neutral US from the effects of war even if they be on the other side of the ocean .
Stalin ’ s bombastic threats directed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Communism rising in Soviet occupied Eastern Europe hardened American attitudes ; “ Postwar Soviet expansionism in Eastern Europe fueled many Americans ’ fears of a Russian plan to control the world ” .
LINK America had just fought a war to liberate Europe from Nazi tyranny , and after so much sacrifice in blood , Americans were not about to let Western Europe suffer the same fate of Eastern Europe .
US global leadership was a natural consequence of American exceptionalism – reinforced by the public ’ s perception that while “ America @ @ @ @ @ @ @ without the United States , the war against Axis fascism would have been lost ” .
LINK The perception was that US power and resolve saved the world from tyranny and being the supreme power of the free world comes supreme responsibility – to protect those just saved from Nazi Germany from the rising threat of communism .
For Truman , Containment was the practical component that was needed for a US foreign policy that will both stand tough against communism and prevent a nuclear war by respecting the status quo – this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Soviet Union to collapse due to its own internal contradictions .
But containment needed to be wrapped in ideology that resonated with the American public and the marriage of idealism with realism was not without problems .
When the US stepped up to be leader of the free world , it was premised on the assent of nations seeking to protect and preserve their democratic institutions .
This was evident in President Truman ’ s speech before Congress in 1947 – “ The free peoples of the world look to us for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ How Truman defines America ’ s leadership role is not to export democracy , it is to defend democracy wherever it exists , backed by supreme military might – peace through strength .
Failure to back words with deeds undermines credibility and this is particularly so when involving a position of global moral standing .
However , the damage can be mitigated if “ ” warrant such in the eyes of observers – for example , when the Soviet Union used its military to crush the 1956 uprising in Hungary , Eisenhower did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to statements of support for the people of Hungary : The people of Hungary needed more than just verbal support , they needed NATO military intervention , otherwise , the rebellion would be crushed .
However , Containment policy would reject intervention since Hungary was within the Soviet sphere and existing spheres were to be respected – direct military support risked all out war .
Further , feasibility was questionable given Hungary had no land border with NATO .
In the clash between the realism of containment and the idealism of freeing Eastern @ @ @ @ @ @ @ understood the riskiness of the latter : In this case , the limits of idealist driven action can be understood given the grave risk of a global war if Eisenhower approved intervention in Hungary .
While the roles of realism and idealism in practical application have been observed , international relations theories seem polarised on this topic .
The Realist view is that Cold War policies were driven by security interests while the ideological-based approach places ideology front and centre .
And between the two is a wide chasm that is largely empty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a venerable treatise on classical realism , there is to be found a bridge across the chasm .
In “ Politics among Nations : The Struggle for Power and Peace “ , Morgenthau presents six principles of Classical Realism – relevant is his 4th principle : the relationship between realism and ethics .
In a critique of Morgenthau ’ s work , this was said of the 4th principle : From Defender of Democracy to Pre-emptive Defence of Democracy The interplay of ideology and realism played an important role in US foreign policy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the boundaries of what is legitimate action while Realism filters out what is not feasible or bears unacceptable risks given the circumstances .
When properly balanced , ideology and realism together bring clarity and purpose to both the formulation of policy and how it is put into practice .
However , this could not be said of US post-911 foreign policy : Justifying intervention in the name of exporting democracy is cloaking naked aggression with a misguided interpretation of what is meant by ‘ Defender of Democracy ’ – And where did this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from ?
The post-911 ‘ Bush Doctrine ’ made ‘ preventive self-defence ’ a major plank in US foreign policy as outlined in Bush ’ s 2002 National Security Strategy ( NSS ) : One problem was its application in practice , for example , the invasion of Iraq that was justified by fabricated evidence of non-existent WMD .
When the WMD could not be found , the justification shifted to bringing democracy to Iraq , saving the Iraqi people from a brutal dictator – as for how thrilled are the Iraqi people… @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , there we have it , pre-emptive defence of democracy – just as we can pre-emptively defend against a threat before it exists , we can pre-emptively defend democracy before it exists… impeccable logic .
Bush ’ s NSS 2002 also argues “ The United States has long maintained the option of pre-emptive actions to counter a sufficient threat to our national security .
” LINK Not exactly .
In 1958 , President Eisenhower approved NSC 5801 and of interest is clause 20 : Just as nations rallied around the US for protection @ @ @ @ @ @ @ global communist tyranny , nations united in opposition to Bush ’ s brand of tyrannical foreign policy .
Eventually US hegemony eroded to the point that the ability of the US to impose its will was lost .
Unfortunately , disastrous foreign interventions have done tremendous harm to US global standing as well as sparking a growing anti-foreign wars populist movement on the domestic front .
The Election of President Trump and the Language of Isolationism Trump campaigned on extricating the US from foreign conflicts invoking isolationist language such as ‘ America first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s isolationist “ America First Committee ” .
Petraeus would certainly be aware of how post-911 US foreign policy has done tremendous harm to US global standing and mobilized strong domestic opposition to foreign interventions – a rekindling of the isolationist roots of the Republic .
This is the price to be paid for a disastrous foreign policy backed by the might of the US military .
Ever since the Founding Fathers expressed their disdain for ‘ entangling alliances ’ , the rivalry between ‘ isolationists ’ and ‘ internationalists ’ for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a back and forth tug of war .
But whenever isolationism was beaten into retreat such as US entry into WW1 , it would always make a comeback .
Trump ’ s choice of words ‘ America First ’ was I think intentional , as it connects to an ever-present isolationist undercurrent in the American psyche – and targeted towards the rising populist movement that propelled Trump into office and has revived the debate once again .
LINK In the nearly four years since Trump won the Presidency , has the US @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Trying to answer reminds me of the Ozzy Osbourne song ‘ Crazy Train ’ .
During Trump ’ s inaugural speech , he spoke of the need to rebuild the US military following many years of neglect and since then made good on his word – “ the president has positioned himself as a steadfast supporter of the troops whose administration has rebuilt the U.S. military .
” Yet Trump attacked the military-industrial complex reminiscent of Eisenhower ’ s farewell address in 1961 : And yet , Trump celebrated Islamophobia by brokering @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Saudi Arabia worth $ 350 billion over ten years , ‘ so that all of those wonderful companies that make the bombs and make the planes and make everything else stay happy .
’ Given Trump ’ s ‘ Cold War Warrior ’ stance on China and strong support for arms exports and modernization of US conventional and nuclear forces , the military could hardly ask for more .
LINK In Part 1 , I argued that the US military would favor instigating a New Cold War with China after declaring in 2017 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ end .
If there is any doubt about US military intentions regarding China , a cursory review of US military planning documents leaves no ambiguity – I could not resist the emojis .
I discussed in Part 1 the recognition by the US military of a return to great power rivalry and the need for increased military expenditures [ page 5 ] .
However , while all the talk is about the return to great power rivalry , the narrative does not support this .
Further , US military expenditures are equal to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ powers combined and recent US planning documents indicate global military dominance will be maintained for the foreseeable future to counter rising powers Russia and China : LINK The recent military budget increases , for what is already a massive budget , as well as pointing to Russia and China as the main rising threats to US dominance , suggests the plan is a return to superpower rivalry .
This is practically spelled out by Secretary of Defence Mark Esper in a July 2020 update of the 2018 National Defence Strategy ( NDS ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the focus on understanding how China thinks , just like during the Cold War in understanding how the Soviet Union would think .
And towards this end , Defence Secretary Esper directed the “ National Defense University to refocus its curriculum by dedicating 50 percent of the coursework to China , and … to make China the pacing threat in all of our schools , programs , and training .
” , [ , p.2 ] .
This is clearly in anticipation of superpower rivalry with China while relegating Russia as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ below the radar .
This is reminiscent of the first Cold War which had as primary threat the Soviet Union and China as secondary threat – in the New Cold War , these roles are now reversed .
Why China is viewed as the main threat is easy enough to understand .
In addition to ideological reasons , China is currently second only to the US in both military and economic power .
China ’ s military spending for 2020 is , according to the CCP , RMB 1.268 trillion or US $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ small compared to the $ 732 billion US military budget , there are a few things to consider .
First , the CCP official figures lack transparency and unofficial estimates place actual spending at 1.5 times the CCP figure or approximately $ 265 billion – which is four times Russian military spending .
Second , the US is a global power with global commitments and so the US does not and can not direct all of its military power to countering China .
The 2020 NDS update states 50 % of educational and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ let us hypothetically assign 50 % of the US military budget to facing off with China ; that works out to $ 367 billion ; we can see why the designation of China as effectively near-peer .
There is also the historical trajectory of China showing its steady rise to dominance in East Asia : China now dominates in the region and has been flexing its new found muscles in an increasingly belligerent manner .
This has caused apprehension among ASEAN nations as to China ’ s intent in the region which the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and strengthen existing ones .
In Part One , I touched upon the formation of an India , Japan , South Korea , Australia , US Indo-Pacific ‘ NATO ’ .
This development is now acknowledged by China as a major security risk : Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi – who had , two years ago , compared the grouping to sea foam – is now convinced it underpins “ a so-called Indo-Pacific NATO.
” …Wang noted that the U.S. Indo-Pacific strategy is a “ big underlying security risk ” and that “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cold War mentality and to stir up confrontation among different groups and blocs… ” LINK And this was predicted back in 2005 : As these developments unfold , we might ask why the US does not retreat back to focus on the Western Hemisphere of North , Central and South America rather then spread itself thin to face a rising power across a vast ocean on the other side of the planet .
Trump campaigned on extricating the US from foreign conflicts as part of a more isolationist ‘ America first ’ campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up confrontation with China ?
To have a deeper understanding of why from the perspective of the US military establishment , we need to examine the basis for the MIC ’ s power to influence US policy as well as its special interests – and then map this onto actual US policies .
From there , we can predict future policy moves .
This will be the focus of the next part of this series .
MORE ON THE TOPIC : • Views Of US Military Analysts On Use Of Special Operations Forces @ @ @

Support SouthFront
Written by Stewart J. Melanson PhD exclusively for SouthFront
Part 2: Ideological Warfare
Introduction: Modern Warfare is Ideological
I begin Part 2 with a bit of history about America’s journey from isolationism to ‘leader of the free world’ following the defeat of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. The surprise Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor that thrust the US into WW2 taught America that neutrality and an insular foreign policy focused on the Western Hemisphere was no longer realistic policy – belligerents on the other side of the world could and would bring violence to America’s neutral shores.
The Truman Doctrine (1947) transformed US foreign policy from isolationist to US global leadership in defending the free world from the spread of communism and containing an expansionist Soviet Union – this was George Kennan’s Policy of Containment. To avoid a future global war, policy was to contain the Soviet Union to its existing sphere to allow time for the internal contradictions of communist ideology to cause rot from within, resulting in eventual collapse – this was Kennan’s concept of strategic patience. But why should the American people support such a far-reaching doctrine in the first place? President Truman was able to win public support by appealing to American values and tapping into American exceptionalism – America was destined to lead the world.
Truman was successful in getting public buy-in of his doctrine by wedding Containment with Wilsonian idealism and American values of liberty, equality, freedom of the press, rule of law, pursuit of happiness. In opposition was an ideology that threatened everything Americans held dear and this proved highly effective in mobilizing public support for policies that represented nothing less than a stunning about face for a traditionally isolationist nation. This set the stage for the Cold War; an epic ideological struggle between superpowers, a contest that would be determined by who had the superior ideology.
Eventually it was the Soviet Union that collapsed, leaving a triumphant US and her allies to extoll the superiority (now validated) of liberal Western ideology. This perception of ideological superiority over communism remains true to this very day. How else would public opinion be so quickly and uniformly turned against the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in a matter of 2 to 3 years. In contrast to the less successful decade long media campaign to demonize Russia and Putin. LINK; LINK
Russia and evil dictator Putin bashing is propaganda, so is China bashing, but there is a difference, the public sees far more truth regarding China compared to Russia/Putin. Those living in a democracy can at least relate with media reporting on Russia such as reporting a drop in poll numbers revealing cracks in Putin’s popularity among Russians. Those living in democracies can identify with this, being constantly bombarded with polling results, a staple of a functioning democracy.
During the Cold War, the Soviet Union was impenetrable other than what was strictly controlled by the communist party – a closed mysterious society ruled by a totalitarian regime. Today, Russia is nothing like the closed repressed society of the former Soviet Union. In contrast, the CCP has many similarities with the Soviet Union – one-party authoritarian rule, intolerant of dissent – there is no polling, no free press and heavy-handed government control of any information coming in or out of China – basically the antichrist of Western ideology.
The first Cold War was first and foremost a struggle between competing ideologies – democracy, open society and free markets (capitalism) versus communist authoritarianism, closed society and centralized command economy. If the US is entering into a New Cold War, I expect it to be much like the first Cold War, a war of ideologies – and who steps into the old Cold War rivals shoes the best? In a nutshell, China works best as a New Cold War rival because it is much harder to demonize Russia as they are far more like us compared to the CCP, who are clearly more like ‘them’, the former Soviet Union. While there are other factors that make China the more suitable candidate for Cold War rival, the role of ideology is crucial to understand.
A Tale of Two Ideologies or will it be a Tale of One Ideology
Given the similarities of the CCP and the communist party that ruled the Soviet Union, the US and her new ‘Pacific NATO’ allies can act to contain the CCP’s expansionist ambitions while patiently waiting for the CCP to collapse under the weight of its flawed ideology – strategic patience for the 21st century:
The American military contest with China … will define the twenty-first century. And China will be a more formidable adversary than Russia ever was… The United States and China will be locked in a contest for decades. But Washington can win if it stays more patient than Beijing. LINK
The author Robert Kaplan believes Washington can win if patient, which takes a page right out of the book of the first Cold War – Kennan advocated strategic patience because he believed the superiority of Western ideology would win out. And in an earlier article published in the Atlantic, Kaplan left little to the imagination regarding US-China rivalry: “a replay of the decades-long Cold War, with a center of gravity not in the heart of Europe but, rather, among Pacific atolls.” LINK
This of course assumes the US does not abandon its ideology, for example, becoming an authoritarian state. Prior to 9-11, the possibility of a US dictatorship did not cross my mind. Recently and particularly in our current year from hell, I am amazed by the media hysteria over possible dictatorship, civil war, revolution, an evil Trump coup-de-tat or what I think to be most likely, a takeover of the White House by energy vampires from space.
I live in Canada and was born Canadian, but I grew up in the US and so for me, there is this strong connection with America. I remember grade school standing outside for the morning raising of the stars and stripes with right hand over one’s heart to pledge allegiance. I had no need to look up the wording on the Internet, I remember the words I and my fellow classmates spoke almost 50 years ago:
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America; and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Now I see a nation divided by a polarising media in the lead-up to perhaps one of the most contentious presidential elections in history. But there have been contentious elections in the past and I think the media are intentionally stoking division. Taken from a June 2020 NBC News article authored by Jeff McCausland, retired U.S. Army colonel and former member of the NSC:
… the nation’s uniformed military leadership… swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies — foreign and domestic. But they have also sworn to obey the orders of the president as commander in chief. Trump …seems bent on forcing these senior military officers to choose between these potentially conflicting loyalties, and some fear such a dilemma could occur soon. LINK
This and statements by retired General Mattis and other former military officials is highly extraordinary: “For senior retired military officers to level such criticism against a serving president is unprecedented and signals a true constitutional crisis over American civil-military relations.” Constitutional crisis? Fortunately, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, effectively doused the inflammatory rhetoric – but not without one more grasping at straws attempt to politicise General Milley’s statements. On Aug. 28, 2020, Forbes published an article titled: “ Top U.S. General Promises Military Will Stay Out Of The Election Process ” LINK, but then the article begins:
The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, told Congress the military would steer clear of the upcoming presidential election process and refuse to obey unlawful orders, a pledge that comes amid fears that President Trump may not accept the election results if he loses and refuse to leave office…
The ‘pledge’ by General Milley is what he would say regardless of who has what fears or who is in the Oval Office, whether it be Trump, Biden, Obama, Bush or Darth Vader. General Milley was right to put to rest rampant speculation of military involvement in the upcoming November election:
In the event of a dispute over some aspect of the elections, by law U.S. courts and the U.S. Congress are required to resolve any disputes, not the U.S. Military,” Milley told Congress.
If for some reason the Republic falls, and the US becomes a dictatorship, the US will be no different from the CCP and the New Cold War will no longer be about two opposing ideologies, it will become a tale of two nations and one ideology – the CCP’s ideology. But I highly doubt this is around the corner or even in the foreseeable future. I will return to this later. What follows is a discussion of the historical evolution of US foreign policy and the role of ideology.
The Enlightenment Movement and Wilsonian Idealism
President Woodrow Wilson’s 14 points was a response to the unprecedented destruction of WW1 which the great power alliances of Europe were suppose to prevent. Wilson’s proposed League of Nations was an early effort towards global cooperation as an alternative to grand alliances in preventing war. LINK
Wilson advocated that the victors show leniency towards the vanquished central powers as part of his plan for a “just peace” to avert laying the foundation for a future war, but the “European leaders were not interested in a just peace. They were interested in retribution”. LINK The importance of the punitive Versailles Treaty in Hitler’s rise to power is well documented in: William Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany , Simon & Schuster; latest edition 2011.
If Germany had been offered a ‘just peace’ as advocated by Wilson, it would have removed one of Hitler’s major election promises that propelled him to power – he would rip up the Versailles Treaty and restore Germany’s dignity. An unjust peace creates the conditions for future war while a just peace could prevent such a conflict – this is the core principle of cooperative security; “Cooperative security thus displaces the centerpiece of security planning from preparing to counter threats to preventing such threats from arising” – Carter A., Perry W., Steinbrunner J.D. (1992) A New Concept of Cooperative Security ; Brookings Institution, Washington D.C. p. 7.
Wilson’s ideas to prevent future wars were visionary and would influence Kennan’s thinking in shaping his Policy of Containment which would guide US foreign policy during the Cold War. Wilson’s proposals to prevent war were a part of his idealistic 14 points inspired by the Enlightenment Movement:
The Enlightenment affected many areas of human existence, including politics; perhaps the most famous examples of the latter are the US Declaration of Independence and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen. LINK – and Enlightenment ideals were the framework for Wilson’s internationalist vision: “the rule of law, democracy, a free press, free trade, freedom of the seas… and human rights which have undergirded… America’s bid for global leadership.” LINK
American Isolationism Frustrates Wilson’s Internationalist Vision
Wilson’s January 8, 1918 address to Congress articulated his 14 points (LINK) that called for a more internationalist US role to ensure:
…that the world be made fit and safe to live in; and particularly that it be made safe for every peace-loving nation which, like our own, wishes to live its own life, determine its own institutions, be assured of justice and fair dealing by the other peoples of the world as against force and selfish aggression. LINK
Wilson’s assertion that international stability had a direct bearing on America’s own security failed to convince isolationists; “…the United States refused to take part in the League of Nations. Isolationists in Congress feared it would draw the United States into international affairs unnecessarily” LINK. Although hundreds of American lives were lost due to unrestricted German submarine warfare, pulling the US into WW1, the American public had no appetite for further entanglement in European affairs, preferring a return to isolationism.
World War II and the End of the Golden Age of American Isolationism
Kennan’s Containment Policy, predicated on the long view of containing communism without igniting a nuclear war, would necessitate pulling the US out of her isolationists shell. When Truman made the decision to adopt Kennan’s Policy of Containment, he realised that if communism is to be actively contained, the US must be prepared to intervene in places far from America’s shores, representing a significant reorientation of US foreign policy.
The isolationist movement in the US could have frustrated Truman’s post-WW2 internationalist vision, just as the movement had frustrated President Wilson’s post-WW1 vision. When WW2 broke out, the US maintained neutrality due to a strong campaign against involvement such as the ‘America First Committee’ (AFC) led by prominent isolationists such as Charles Lindbergh. LINK
But the arguments for maintaining US neutrality were to be swept away in a single day when on December 7, 1941, the Japanese attacked without warning the US naval base at Pearl Harbor, causing immense carnage with thousands of American lives lost. The surprise attack came as a total shock that jolted even staunch isolationists likes Lindbergh, and the AFC soon disbanded. In the aftermath of WW2:
… the emerging threat posed by Russia under Joseph Stalin and the specter of communism that would soon result in the Cold War effectively lowered the curtain on the golden age of American isolationism. LINK
From Isolationism to Leader of the Free World
Global US leadership was an entirely new experience for Americans as was maintaining an armaments industry to meet the needs of the military to maintain deterrence to keep the Soviets in check. The face-off between the US and the Soviet Union would go on for 40+ years – a period of superpower rivalry that would justify a powerful US military in order to deter a powerful Soviet military.
Such a rivalry would seem dangerous, and to an extent it was, but US foreign Policy was guided by Containment with its purpose to prevent nuclear war while at the same time containing Soviet expansionism. The policy was endorsed by the military given that the need to contain Soviet expansion justified large military budgets to preserve a stable international system; war without war, a ‘Cold War’.
And a large budget was an understatement as US military spending nearly equaled the military spending of all other nations combined. What justified such extravagance was the US assuming the role of global defender of Democracy and the President, leader of the free world. As such, the US could find itself fighting simultaneous conflicts to contain communism all over the world, and this would need a big, big budget. And Truman, a dedicated Wilsonian, proved masterful in convincing the American public, by appealing to American values, to support his new internationalist policy – the Truman Doctrine. On March 12, 1947, Truman stood before Congress to lay out his grand vision of a new foreign policy premised on the need for the US to assume global leadership to safeguard democracy:
… The free peoples of the world look to us for support in maintaining their freedoms. If we falter in our leadership, we may endanger the peace of the world — and we shall surely endanger the welfare of our own nation. Great responsibilities have been placed upon us by the swift movement of events. LINK
Congressional leaders and the American public applauded Truman’s vision with a spike in Truman’s approval rating rising from 48% to 63%. LINK The timing of Truman’s speech was just right – the trauma of Pearl Harbor dealt a death blow to the isolationist movement as Americans came to the realisation that Wilson was correct, neutrality could not shield a neutral US from the effects of war even if they be on the other side of the ocean.
Stalin’s bombastic threats directed at the West and the tyranny of Communism rising in Soviet occupied Eastern Europe hardened American attitudes; “Postwar Soviet expansionism in Eastern Europe fueled many Americans’ fears of a Russian plan to control the world”. LINK America had just fought a war to liberate Europe from Nazi tyranny, and after so much sacrifice in blood, Americans were not about to let Western Europe suffer the same fate of Eastern Europe.
US global leadership was a natural consequence of American exceptionalism – reinforced by the public’s perception that while “America did not win World War II alone… without the United States, the war against Axis fascism would have been lost”. LINK The perception was that US power and resolve saved the world from tyranny and being the supreme power of the free world comes supreme responsibility – to protect those just saved from Nazi Germany from the rising threat of communism.
For Truman, Containment was the practical component that was needed for a US foreign policy that will both stand tough against communism and prevent a nuclear war by respecting the status quo – this strategy was premised on patience to allow the Soviet Union to collapse due to its own internal contradictions. But containment needed to be wrapped in ideology that resonated with the American public and the marriage of idealism with realism was not without problems.
Combining Idealism and Realism (Containment): Policy Tension
When the US stepped up to be leader of the free world, it was premised on the assent of nations seeking to protect and preserve their democratic institutions. This was evident in President Truman’s speech before Congress in 1947 – “The free peoples of the world look to us for support in maintaining their freedoms.” How Truman defines America’s leadership role is not to export democracy, it is to defend democracy wherever it exists, backed by supreme military might – peace through strength.
Failure to back words with deeds undermines credibility and this is particularly so when involving a position of global moral standing. However, the damage can be mitigated if “circumstances of time and place” warrant such in the eyes of observers – for example, when the Soviet Union used its military to crush the 1956 uprising in Hungary, Eisenhower did not intervene militarily, limiting his response to statements of support for the people of Hungary:
The United States deplores the intervention of Soviet military forces… the presence of which in Hungary, as is now demonstrated, is not to protect Hungary… but rather to continue an occupation of Hungary… The heart of America goes out to the people of Hungary. LINK
The people of Hungary needed more than just verbal support, they needed NATO military intervention, otherwise, the rebellion would be crushed. However, Containment policy would reject intervention since Hungary was within the Soviet sphere and existing spheres were to be respected – direct military support risked all out war. Further, feasibility was questionable given Hungary had no land border with NATO. In the clash between the realism of containment and the idealism of freeing Eastern Europe from the Soviet boot, Eisenhower understood the riskiness of the latter:
There is little doubt that he was deeply upset by the crushing of the revolt, and he was not deaf to public pressure or the emotional lobbying of activists within his own administration. But he had also determined… there was little the United States could do short of risking global war to help the rebels. And he was not prepared to go that far. LINK
In this case, the limits of idealist driven action can be understood given the grave risk of a global war if Eisenhower approved intervention in Hungary. While the roles of realism and idealism in practical application have been observed, international relations theories seem polarised on this topic.
The Realist view is that Cold War policies were driven by security interests while the ideological-based approach places ideology front and centre. And between the two is a wide chasm that is largely empty. Yet, In the pages of a venerable treatise on classical realism, there is to be found a bridge across the chasm. In “ Politics among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace “, Morgenthau presents six principles of Classical Realism – relevant is his 4th principle: the relationship between realism and ethics. In a critique of Morgenthau’s work, this was said of the 4th principle:
…while realists are aware of the moral significance of political action, they are also aware of the tension between morality and the requirements of successful political action. “Universal moral principles,” he asserts, “cannot be applied to the actions of states in their abstract universal formulation, but …they must be filtered through the concrete circumstances of time and place”. LINK 2nd Edition 1954
From Defender of Democracy to Pre-emptive Defence of Democracy
The interplay of ideology and realism played an important role in US foreign policy during the Cold War. Ideology defines the boundaries of what is legitimate action while Realism filters out what is not feasible or bears unacceptable risks given the circumstances. When properly balanced, ideology and realism together bring clarity and purpose to both the formulation of policy and how it is put into practice. However, this could not be said of US post-911 foreign policy:
Drunk on the ideology of spreading democracy everywhere, Americans, as John Quincy Adams long ago warned might happen, have gone abroad in search of monsters to destroy but have become monsters themselves, wreaking havoc with unnecessary wars and creating anarchy in Libya and Iraq in the name of regime change. LINK
Justifying intervention in the name of exporting democracy is cloaking naked aggression with a misguided interpretation of what is meant by ‘Defender of Democracy’ – And where did this misguided view that offence is defence come from? The post-911 ‘Bush Doctrine’ made ‘preventive self-defence’ a major plank in US foreign policy as outlined in Bush’s 2002 National Security Strategy (NSS):
… The greater the threat, the greater is the risk of inaction— … the case for taking anticipatory action to defend ourselves, even if uncertainty remains as to the time and place of the enemy’s attack. To forestall or prevent such hostile acts by our adversaries, the United States will, if necessary, act pre-emptively. LINK
One problem was its application in practice, for example, the invasion of Iraq that was justified by fabricated evidence of non-existent WMD. When the WMD could not be found, the justification shifted to bringing democracy to Iraq, saving the Iraqi people from a brutal dictator – as for how thrilled are the Iraqi people… no need to comment.
And so, there we have it, pre-emptive defence of democracy – just as we can pre-emptively defend against a threat before it exists, we can pre-emptively defend democracy before it exists… impeccable logic. Bush’s NSS 2002 also argues “The United States has long maintained the option of pre-emptive actions to counter a sufficient threat to our national security.” LINK Not exactly. In 1958, President Eisenhower approved NSC 5801 and of interest is clause 20:
20. The United States and its allies must reject the concept of preventive war or acts intended to provoke war. Hence, the United States should attempt to make clear, by word and conduct, that it is not our intention to provoke war. LINK
Just as nations rallied around the US for protection from perceived communist designs to establish a global communist tyranny, nations united in opposition to Bush’s brand of tyrannical foreign policy. Eventually US hegemony eroded to the point that the ability of the US to impose its will was lost. Unfortunately, disastrous foreign interventions have done tremendous harm to US global standing as well as sparking a growing anti-foreign wars populist movement on the domestic front.
The Election of President Trump and the Language of Isolationism
Trump campaigned on extricating the US from foreign conflicts invoking isolationist language such as ‘America first’ which harkens back to Charles Lindbergh’s isolationist “America First Committee”.
…after the devastation of [WW2], isolationism was out of fashion. Instead, America became the driving force in establishing a global web …NATO, the United Nations, a strong U.S. military presence in Asia, open seas, a host of trade agreements. These arrangements are now being challenged by President Trump… as a burden the U.S. should shed, [encapsulated in] the phrase “America First.” …Trump, like Lindbergh before him, argues the U.S. should not be the world’s policeman… “The U.S. should not be promoting its values internationally. It should not be telling other counties how they run themselves” … [Americans saw] “It was trillions of dollars wasted in Iraq and Afghanistan, with thousands of American lives lost … and they don’t want to see that anymore.” Trump has talked mostly about disrupting the world order, without saying what would replace it. Yet if the U.S. simply recedes from its superpower role, Russia, China and Iran and others would gladly step in to fill that void, according to many analysts… … Petraeus warned… the U.S. still has the resources to be a superpower, but he worries about “something perhaps even more pernicious — a loss of self-confidence, resolve and strategic clarity on America’s part about our vital interest in preserving and protecting the system we sacrificed so much to bring into being . ” LINK
Petraeus would certainly be aware of how post-911 US foreign policy has done tremendous harm to US global standing and mobilized strong domestic opposition to foreign interventions – a rekindling of the isolationist roots of the Republic. This is the price to be paid for a disastrous foreign policy backed by the might of the US military. Ever since the Founding Fathers expressed their disdain for ‘entangling alliances’, the rivalry between ‘isolationists’ and ‘internationalists’ for influence over US foreign policy has raged in a back and forth tug of war. But whenever isolationism was beaten into retreat such as US entry into WW1, it would always make a comeback.
Trump’s choice of words ‘America First’ was I think intentional, as it connects to an ever-present isolationist undercurrent in the American psyche – and targeted towards the rising populist movement that propelled Trump into office and has revived the debate once again. LINK
In the nearly four years since Trump won the Presidency, has the US moved towards a more isolationist foreign policy? Trying to answer reminds me of the Ozzy Osbourne song ‘Crazy Train’. During Trump’s inaugural speech, he spoke of the need to rebuild the US military following many years of neglect and since then made good on his word – “the president has positioned himself as a steadfast supporter of the troops whose administration has rebuilt the U.S. military.” Yet Trump attacked the military-industrial complex reminiscent of Eisenhower’s farewell address in 1961:
I’m not saying the military is in love with me; the soldiers are,” the president added. “The top people in the Pentagon probably aren’t because they want to do nothing but fight wars so that all of those wonderful companies that make the bombs and make the planes and make everything else stay happy. LINK
And yet, Trump celebrated Islamophobia by brokering the largest military arms sale ever to Saudi Arabia worth $350 billion over ten years, ‘so that all of those wonderful companies that make the bombs and make the planes and make everything else stay happy.’ Given Trump’s ‘Cold War Warrior’ stance on China and strong support for arms exports and modernization of US conventional and nuclear forces, the military could hardly ask for more. LINK
In Part 1, I argued that the US military would favor instigating a New Cold War with China after declaring in 2017 that US hegemony had come to an end. If there is any doubt about US military intentions regarding China, a cursory review of US military planning documents leaves no ambiguity – I could not resist the emojis.
Future: US Isolationism, Great Power Rivalry or New Cold War Superpower Rivalry
I discussed in Part 1 the recognition by the US military of a return to great power rivalry and the need for increased military expenditures [page 5]. However, while all the talk is about the return to great power rivalry, the narrative does not support this. Further, US military expenditures are equal to the military budgets of all other great powers combined and recent US planning documents indicate global military dominance will be maintained for the foreseeable future to counter rising powers Russia and China: LINK
The recent military budget increases, for what is already a massive budget, as well as pointing to Russia and China as the main rising threats to US dominance, suggests the plan is a return to superpower rivalry. This is practically spelled out by Secretary of Defence Mark Esper in a July 2020 update of the 2018 National Defence Strategy (NDS):
…we are now in an era of Great Power Competition; and that China, then Russia, constitute our top strategic competitors. To be successful in this new global environment, we must … first, improve the lethality and readiness of the force; second, strengthen allies and build partners; and third, reform the Department [of Defence] for greater efficiency and accountability. …the priority that drives and underlies many of our efforts today – is to focus the Department [of Defence] on China. This is the primary lens through which we are advancing each line of effort under the NDS, which guides us in addressing near-term challenges while preparing us once again for high-intensity conflict in the future… senior leadership team meetings held regularly to drive integrated action on China first, then Russia. A newly established China Strategy Management Group further pushes that agenda forward. A vital part of that action is the training and education of personnel across the U.S. Armed Forces. Our future leaders must understand how China thinks about war, how the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) is organized, what kind of weapons and equipment they use, and how they fight – the way our past leaders and I were once required to understand Soviet systems and doctrine. LINK [pp 1-2]
China first, then Russia, with the focus on understanding how China thinks, just like during the Cold War in understanding how the Soviet Union would think. And towards this end, Defence Secretary Esper directed the “National Defense University to refocus its curriculum by dedicating 50 percent of the coursework to China, and … to make China the pacing threat in all of our schools, programs, and training.”, [Ibid, p.2]. This is clearly in anticipation of superpower rivalry with China while relegating Russia as a secondary threat – and everyone else is below the radar. This is reminiscent of the first Cold War which had as primary threat the Soviet Union and China as secondary threat – in the New Cold War, these roles are now reversed.
Why China is viewed as the main threat is easy enough to understand. In addition to ideological reasons, China is currently second only to the US in both military and economic power. China’s military spending for 2020 is, according to the CCP, RMB 1.268 trillion or US$178.6 billion. While this may seem small compared to the $732 billion US military budget, there are a few things to consider.
First, the CCP official figures lack transparency and unofficial estimates place actual spending at 1.5 times the CCP figure or approximately $265 billion – which is four times Russian military spending. Second, the US is a global power with global commitments and so the US does not and cannot direct all of its military power to countering China. The 2020 NDS update states 50% of educational and training programs to be China focused – let us hypothetically assign 50% of the US military budget to facing off with China; that works out to $367 billion; we can see why the designation of China as effectively near-peer. There is also the historical trajectory of China showing its steady rise to dominance in East Asia:
…East Asian spending has increased from $92.8 billion in 1990 to $363 billion in 2019. Much of this growth in expenditure has been driven by China. In 1990, China constituted 23.6 percent of total East Asian expenditure. As of 2019, this number stands at 70.5 percent. In terms of the broader regional context, the Chinese military budget constitutes 52.2 percent of the total cumulative spending across all of Asia (including those in the Middle East). LINK
China now dominates in the region and has been flexing its new found muscles in an increasingly belligerent manner. This has caused apprehension among ASEAN nations as to China’s intent in the region which the US is exploiting to build new alliances and strengthen existing ones. In Part One, I touched upon the formation of an India, Japan, South Korea, Australia, US Indo-Pacific ‘NATO’. This development is now acknowledged by China as a major security risk:
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi – who had, two years ago, compared the grouping to sea foam – is now convinced it underpins “a so-called Indo-Pacific NATO.” …Wang noted that the U.S. Indo-Pacific strategy is a “big underlying security risk” and that “what it pursues is to trumpet the Cold War mentality and to stir up confrontation among different groups and blocs…” LINK
And this was predicted back in 2005:
…The Chinese navy is poised to push out into the Pacific—and when it does, it will very quickly encounter a U.S. Navy and Air Force unwilling to budge from the coastal shelf of the Asian mainland. It’s not hard to imagine the result: a replay of the decades-long Cold War, with a center of gravity not in the heart of Europe but, rather, among Pacific atolls… LINK
As these developments unfold, we might ask why the US does not retreat back to focus on the Western Hemisphere of North, Central and South America rather then spread itself thin to face a rising power across a vast ocean on the other side of the planet. Trump campaigned on extricating the US from foreign conflicts as part of a more isolationist ‘America first’ campaign and so why is the US stirring up confrontation with China?
To have a deeper understanding of why from the perspective of the US military establishment, we need to examine the basis for the MIC’s power to influence US policy as well as its special interests – and then map this onto actual US policies. From there, we can predict future policy moves. This will be the focus of the next part of this series.
To be continued…
Stewart J. Melanson PhD
Toronto, Ontario, Canada, Email: sjm@melansonwire.com
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
Support SouthFront


southfront--2020-10-22--Israel Threatened Senior Syrian Officers In Leaflets Dropped In Golan Heights (Photos)

The Israeli military has dropped leaflets with threats to senior Syrian Arab Army ( SAA ) officers in the Syrian-held part of the Golan Heights , Asharq Al-Awsat reported on October 21 .
The leaflet warned the SAA officers from cooperating with Iranian forces or Lebanese Hezbollah for “ money ” or to build a “ resistance.
” “ The interests of Hezbollah and Iran is not the same as the [ SAA ’ s ] 1st Corps , the Syrian state or the residents of al-Golan and Hauran [ the southern region ] , ” the leaflet reads , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hezbollah is a target.
” The leaflets named the following officers : In the early morning , the Israeli military struck a school in the town of al-Hurriyah with a missile .
No human losses were reported as a result of the strike .
“ We won ’ t allow terrorist operatives from Hezbollah or Iran to set up on the Golan Heights border and we will do what is necessary to drive them out of there , ” Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz said in an interview a few hours after the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officers is not the first .
In April , the Israeli military issued a direct threat to Major General Ali Asaad and Hezbollah commander in southern Syria Haj Hashem .
Israel is apparently about to escalate its covert war against Iranian forces in southern Syria .
Israeli strikes on the region will likely increase in the upcoming few weeks and months .
MORE ON THIS TOPIC :

Support SouthFront
The Israeli military has dropped leaflets with threats to senior Syrian Arab Army (SAA) officers in the Syrian-held part of the Golan Heights, Asharq Al-Awsat reported on October 21.
The leaflet warned the SAA officers from cooperating with Iranian forces or Lebanese Hezbollah for “money” or to build a “resistance.”
“The interests of Hezbollah and Iran is not the same as the [SAA’s] 1st Corps, the Syrian state or the residents of al-Golan and Hauran [the southern region],” the leaflet reads, “everyone who works or cooperates with Hezbollah is a target.”
The leaflets named the following officers:
Major General Ali Asaad, commander of the 1 st Corps;
Corps; Major General Akram Hawija, commander of the 7 th Division;
Division; Major General Moufid Hassan, commander of the 5 th Division;
Division; Brigadier General Hussein Hammouch, commander of the 90 th Brigade;
Brigade; Brigadier General Basil Abu Eid, commander of the 112th Brigade.
In the early morning, the Israeli military struck a school in the town of al-Hurriyah with a missile. No human losses were reported as a result of the strike.
“We won’t allow terrorist operatives from Hezbollah or Iran to set up on the Golan Heights border and we will do what is necessary to drive them out of there,” Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz said in an interview a few hours after the attack.
The Israeli threat to Syrian officers is not the first. In April, the Israeli military issued a direct threat to Major General Ali Asaad and Hezbollah commander in southern Syria Haj Hashem.
Israel is apparently about to escalate its covert war against Iranian forces in southern Syria. Israeli strikes on the region will likely increase in the upcoming few weeks and months.
MORE ON THIS TOPIC:
Support SouthFront


southfront--2020-10-22--Ukraine Is Becoming Logistical Hub For Turkish Weapon Supplies To Azerbaijan

The cargo plane of the Azerbaijani airline Silk Way West Airlines Boeing 747 announced that it will fly from Kiev to Milan , but ‘ somehow ’ appeared at the airport in Azerbaijan ’ s Baku , according to the flight path tracked by the Flightradar24 website .
Such an ‘ accident ’ and the state of secrecy surrounding it led to a reasonable concern that in fact the plane was transporting weapons or military and dual-use goods from Ukraine to Azerbaijan , which is de-facto in the state of war with Armenia .
Right now , Azerbaijani troops are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nagorno-Karabakh region .
Furthermore , earlier , Silk Way West Airlines was repeatedly spotted as a part of weapons-trading network that delivers various weapons and ammunition to conflict zones in the Greater Middle East .
Later , such weapons often appear in the hands of terrorist groups .
Military sources emphasize that the activity of transportations along the Kiev-Baku route has significantly increased after the signing of an agreement on cooperation in the defense sphere between Ukraine and Turkey .
Turkey is a key ally of Azerbaijan , which supplies its with weapons @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Armenia .
Ukraine , which has already bored all its ‘ Western partners ’ and achieved little real progress on its path to the so-called European integration ( if one does not count the selling of national interests and economy to foreign actors ) , has been experiencing the rapid increase of the Turkish influence in the country .
Ankara is actively exploiting the situation in Ukraine in order to achieve its own tactical and strategic goals .
In the regard of the conflict in the Nagorno-Karabakh region , Ukrainian authorities have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are now participating in supplying of Azerbaijani forces .
Just a few months ago , the pro-Western government of Armenia , led by Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan , was considering Ukraine as a ‘ natural ally ’ because it was also led by the pro-Western government that gained power after the coup .
However , the reality appeared to be quite different and Armenia ’ s friends sold it immediately .
If the Turkish influence in Ukraine continues to increase and this situation develops and further , the Kiev regime will have all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ puppet of the Washington establishment but also become an outpost of the Turkish expansion in eastern Ukraine .
The Kiev regime already supports actions of Turkish-affiliated structures in the region and seeks to demonstrate that it has no ideological differences with Ankara .
The Ukrainian President vows to develop ‘ strategic partnership ’ with Turkey .
The so-called ‘ independent ’ Orthodox Church of Ukraine did not even condemn the Turkish decision to turn Hagia Sophia into a mosque .
Instead of this , contributes all possible efforts to fight the canonical Ukrainian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It seems that if it is needed to turn Kiev Pechersk Lavra ( historic Orthodox Christian monastery in Kiev ) into a mosque to get a discount for some Turkish Bayraktar TB2 drones , the current Kiev regime will immediately start considering such an option .
MORE ON THE TOPIC : • Bellingcat Goes To War With Ukrainian Opposition • Betrayed In West , Kiev Regime Tries To Find Love In Turkish Arms

Support SouthFront
The cargo plane of the Azerbaijani airline Silk Way West Airlines Boeing 747 announced that it will fly from Kiev to Milan, but ‘somehow’ appeared at the airport in Azerbaijan’s Baku, according to the flight path tracked by the Flightradar24 website.
Such an ‘accident’ and the state of secrecy surrounding it led to a reasonable concern that in fact the plane was transporting weapons or military and dual-use goods from Ukraine to Azerbaijan, which is de-facto in the state of war with Armenia. Right now, Azerbaijani troops are clashing with the Armenians in the contested Nagorno-Karabakh region.
Furthermore, earlier, Silk Way West Airlines was repeatedly spotted as a part of weapons-trading network that delivers various weapons and ammunition to conflict zones in the Greater Middle East. Later, such weapons often appear in the hands of terrorist groups.
Military sources emphasize that the activity of transportations along the Kiev-Baku route has significantly increased after the signing of an agreement on cooperation in the defense sphere between Ukraine and Turkey. Turkey is a key ally of Azerbaijan, which supplies its with weapons and publicly supports Baku in its war with Armenia.
Ukraine, which has already bored all its ‘Western partners’ and achieved little real progress on its path to the so-called European integration (if one does not count the selling of national interests and economy to foreign actors), has been experiencing the rapid increase of the Turkish influence in the country. Ankara is actively exploiting the situation in Ukraine in order to achieve its own tactical and strategic goals. In the regard of the conflict in the Nagorno-Karabakh region, Ukrainian authorities have already declared their support to Azerbaijan and are now participating in supplying of Azerbaijani forces. Just a few months ago, the pro-Western government of Armenia, led by Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, was considering Ukraine as a ‘natural ally’ because it was also led by the pro-Western government that gained power after the coup. However, the reality appeared to be quite different and Armenia’s friends sold it immediately.
If the Turkish influence in Ukraine continues to increase and this situation develops and further, the Kiev regime will have all chances to not only be a useful puppet of the Washington establishment but also become an outpost of the Turkish expansion in eastern Ukraine. The Kiev regime already supports actions of Turkish-affiliated structures in the region and seeks to demonstrate that it has no ideological differences with Ankara. The Ukrainian President vows to develop ‘strategic partnership’ with Turkey. The so-called ‘independent’ Orthodox Church of Ukraine did not even condemn the Turkish decision to turn Hagia Sophia into a mosque. Instead of this, contributes all possible efforts to fight the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate). It seems that if it is needed to turn Kiev Pechersk Lavra (historic Orthodox Christian monastery in Kiev) into a mosque to get a discount for some Turkish Bayraktar TB2 drones, the current Kiev regime will immediately start considering such an option.
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
Support SouthFront


southfront--2020-10-22--Ansar Allah Released Footage Of Resent Attacks On Saudi Forces (Videos)

Ansar Allah ( also known as the Houthis ) , and their local allies continue to carry out attacks against the Saudi-led coalition and its proxies throughout Yemen .
On October 20 and 21 , the Houthis ’ media wing released a number of videos of recent attacks by the group .
Most of the attacks took place near the border with Saudi Arabia .
In the first video , the Houthis destroy a Saudi truck-mounted 50 .
Cal gun in al-Def ’ a hill on the border with the southern Saudi province of Jizan with an anti-tank guided missile @ @ @ @ @ @ @ video , the Houthi engineer units target a vehicle of Saudi forces in the al-Ajarish desert in the northern Yemeni province of al-Jawf with an improvised explosive device ( IED ) .
In the third video , the Houthi engineer units target two pick-up trucks of the Saudi military in al-Jarah valley near Jizan with IEDs .
In the fourth video , the Houthi engineer units damage an armored vehicle of Saudi forces in Abuab al-Hadid near the Kingdom ’ s southern province of ‘ Asir with an IED .
In the fifth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ post of Saudi-backed forces in Majazah along the border with ‘ Asir with a Metis ATGM .
In the sixth Video , the Houthis target a fortified post of Saudi-backed forces along the border with Jizan with a rocket-propelled grenade .
In the seventh video , the Houthis ambushed and killed a group of ten Saudi-backed fighters in al-Rabou ’ ah near ‘ Asir using a heavy IED .
In the eighth video , Houthi fighters can be seen repelling a large attack by Saudi-backed forces on their positions in Tabat al-Husan in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The fighters also launched a counter-attack .
The new videos reveal how the Houthis are relying on well-planned , small-scale attacks to inflict heavy human and material losses on their enemies .
This tactic has been draining Saudi forces since the outbreak of the war in Yemen in 2015 .
MORE ON THIS TOPIC :

Support SouthFront
Ansar Allah (also known as the Houthis), and their local allies continue to carry out attacks against the Saudi-led coalition and its proxies throughout Yemen.
On October 20 and 21, the Houthis’ media wing released a number of videos of recent attacks by the group. Most of the attacks took place near the border with Saudi Arabia.
In the first video, the Houthis destroy a Saudi truck-mounted 50. Cal gun in al-Def’a hill on the border with the southern Saudi province of Jizan with an anti-tank guided missile (ATGM).
In the second video, the Houthi engineer units target a vehicle of Saudi forces in the al-Ajarish desert in the northern Yemeni province of al-Jawf with an improvised explosive device (IED).
In the third video, the Houthi engineer units target two pick-up trucks of the Saudi military in al-Jarah valley near Jizan with IEDs.
In the fourth video, the Houthi engineer units damage an armored vehicle of Saudi forces in Abuab al-Hadid near the Kingdom’s southern province of ‘Asir with an IED.
In the fifth video, the Houthis target a fortified post of Saudi-backed forces in Majazah along the border with ‘Asir with a Metis ATGM.
In the sixth Video, the Houthis target a fortified post of Saudi-backed forces along the border with Jizan with a rocket-propelled grenade.
In the seventh video, the Houthis ambushed and killed a group of ten Saudi-backed fighters in al-Rabou’ah near ‘Asir using a heavy IED.
In the eighth video, Houthi fighters can be seen repelling a large attack by Saudi-backed forces on their positions in Tabat al-Husan in the northern Yemeni province of Tazi. The fighters also launched a counter-attack.
The new videos reveal how the Houthis are relying on well-planned, small-scale attacks to inflict heavy human and material losses on their enemies. This tactic has been draining Saudi forces since the outbreak of the war in Yemen in 2015.
MORE ON THIS TOPIC:
Support SouthFront


southfront--2020-10-22--Armenians Lost Border With Iran. Advancing Azerbaijani Forces Are About To Reach Lachin Corridor (Ma

Armenians Lost Border With Iran. Advancing Azerbaijani Forces Are About To Reach Lachin Corridor (Maps, Videos)

The Armenian defense in the southern part of the Nagorno-Karabakh region seems to be collapsing as the advancing Azerbaijani forces are about to reach the strategic Lachin corridor .
On October 23 , Azerbaijani troops were filmed near the village of Muradxanlı , which is located in about 15 km from the strategic area .
Even if this Azerbaijani unit was just a field recognizance and the main forces of the Turkish-Azerbaijani bloc still have to overcome the Armenian resistance to reach the area , the fact of the Azerbaijani presence there marks the hard situation on the frontline for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Lachin corridor will mark the de-facto lose of the Karabakh war for the Armenian side as the main logistical line between Armenia and the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic will be broken .
Azerbaijani troops are in the area of the village of Muradxanlı : Vestiges of the Bayraktar TB2 drone downed by Armenian forces : Meanwhile , President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev announced that his forces took full control of the Azerbaijani-Iranian border after capturing the village of Aghband .
Earlier , the Azerbaijani leader reported via Twitter that Azerbaijani forces have captured a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ south of the Karabakh region : Claims of Azerbaijan regarding Armenian strikes on settlements and towns outside the contested region : The Armenian military denies the collapse of its defense lines in the south and claims that Azerbaijani units appearing on video are just sabotage parties .
According to the Armenian side , various Azerbaijan troops tried to advance in the western , northern and northwestern directions , but all of these offensive attempts were repelled .
The Azerbaijani military allegedly suffered heavy losses .
The Armenian side insists that Hadrut and Fuzuli @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hands of Azerbaijan .
It insists that various units of the Armed Forces of Azerbaijan penetrate into different settlements in the front-line zone trying to create panic and make selfies there .
These groups , according to Armenian media , are very small and often run away from Armenian troops .
The optimism of Armenian officials are at least surprising .
Forces of Azerbaijan continue to take control of settlements and villages in the south of Karabakh .
Most of them are empty as the locals ( ethnic Armenians ) know well what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the south of Karabakh is already lost for Armenia .
The Azerbaijani advance along the border with Iran through the relatively flat ground ( if one compares it with the rest of Karabakh ) appeared to be a success .
Now the Azerbaijani military and its allies are working to fully secure the border with Iran and set conditions for operation to capture the Lachin corridor .
Armenian troops are engaged in fighting with the Azerbaijanis in southern Karabakh ( 18+ ) : MORE ON THE TOPIC : • New ‘ Humanitarian @ @ @ @ @ @ @

Support SouthFront
The Armenian defense in the southern part of the Nagorno-Karabakh region seems to be collapsing as the advancing Azerbaijani forces are about to reach the strategic Lachin corridor. On October 23, Azerbaijani troops were filmed near the village of Muradxanlı, which is located in about 15 km from the strategic area. Even if this Azerbaijani unit was just a field recognizance and the main forces of the Turkish-Azerbaijani bloc still have to overcome the Armenian resistance to reach the area, the fact of the Azerbaijani presence there marks the hard situation on the frontline for the Armenians.
The cutting off of the Lachin corridor will mark the de-facto lose of the Karabakh war for the Armenian side as the main logistical line between Armenia and the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic will be broken.
HINT: The Lachin corridor is a mountain pass within the de jure borders of Azerbaijan, forming the shortest route between Armenia and the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic (Republic of Artsakh).
Azerbaijani troops are in the area of the village of Muradxanlı:
Armenian troops captured by Azerbaijani forces:
Vestiges of the Bayraktar TB2 drone downed by Armenian forces:
Meanwhile, President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev announced that his forces took full control of the Azerbaijani-Iranian border after capturing the village of Aghband.
“With the liberation of Aghband settlement, taking full control over the state border between Azerbaijan and the Islamic Republic of Iran was ensured. I congratulate the people of Azerbaijan and Iran on this occasion. Long live the victorious Azerbaijani Army!” Aliyev wrote on his official Twitter account.
Earlier, the Azerbaijani leader reported via Twitter that Azerbaijani forces have captured a number of villages and settlements in the south of the Karabakh region:
“The victorious Azerbaijani Army has liberated Kollugishlag, Malatkeshin, Kand Zangilan, Genlik, Valigulubayli, Garadara, Chopadara, Tatar, Tiri, Amirkhanli, Gargulu, Bartaz, Dallakli villages and Aghband settlement of Zangilan district from occupation. Long live Azerbaijani Army! Karabakh is Azerbaijan!” “The victorious Azerbaijani Army has liberated Mollavali, Yukhari Rafadinli, Ashaghi Rafadinli villages of Fuzuli district, Sirik, Shikhlar, Mastalibayli, Darzili villages of Jabrayil district from occupation. Long live Azerbaijani Army! Karabakh is Azerbaijan!”
Claims of Azerbaijan regarding Armenian strikes on settlements and towns outside the contested region:
The Armenian military denies the collapse of its defense lines in the south and claims that Azerbaijani units appearing on video are just sabotage parties. According to the Armenian side, various Azerbaijan troops tried to advance in the western, northern and northwestern directions, but all of these offensive attempts were repelled. The Azerbaijani military allegedly suffered heavy losses.
Active combat operations continue along the entire frontline. @Karabakh_MoD is currently fighting in the villages of Shekher and Jivan in the Martuni region. The #Azerbaijan'is have suffered considerable losses of manpower@Pres_Artsakh spokesperson Vahram Poghosyan — Armenian Unified Infocenter (@ArmenianUnified) October 22, 2020
The Armenian side insists that Hadrut and Fuzuli towns are in fact not in the hands of Azerbaijan. It insists that various units of the Armed Forces of Azerbaijan penetrate into different settlements in the front-line zone trying to create panic and make selfies there. These groups, according to Armenian media, are very small and often run away from Armenian troops. The optimism of Armenian officials are at least surprising.
Forces of Azerbaijan continue to take control of settlements and villages in the south of Karabakh. Most of them are empty as the locals (ethnic Armenians) know well what fate they could face. It seems that the south of Karabakh is already lost for Armenia. The Azerbaijani advance along the border with Iran through the relatively flat ground (if one compares it with the rest of Karabakh) appeared to be a success. Now the Azerbaijani military and its allies are working to fully secure the border with Iran and set conditions for operation to capture the Lachin corridor.
New video showing Syrian fighters in Azerbaijan published by the Armenian MoD. You can see them leaving their wounded behind and not helping them.
The video ends by saying all those seen in the video were neutralized. pic.twitter.com/eTPdTFzECV — 301?? (@301_AD) October 22, 2020
Armenian troops are engaged in fighting with the Azerbaijanis in southern Karabakh (18+):
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
Support SouthFront


southfront--2020-10-22--Weapons Of Karabakh War: Atmos 200 155mm Self-Propelled Howitzer

The Atmos 2000 155mm self-propelled howitzer is produced by Soltam Systems of Haifa , Israel .
The company is part of Elbit Systems .
The Atmos artillery system is available with 155mm 39 , 45 and 52 calibre barrels .
The development and test phase of the program has been successfully completed and the system has entered full-scale production .
As an option , the Atmos 2000 155mm 45 calibres can also be equipped with a Russian 130mm M-46 gun .
The Atmos artillery system weighs 22,000kg .
The system is transportable in a C-130 Hercules medium transport aircraft and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ order to be relocated over long distances .
The Atmos 2000 began trials with the Israeli Defence Force in 2006 .
The ATMOS can be mounted on any adapted high-mobility 6×6 or 8×8 truck chassis preferred by the customer .
The protected cabin of the ATMOS is designed for a crew of 2-6 personnel , a driver , a commander , and an additional three to four crew members along with all personal equipment and small arms .
The cabin is equipped with an air conditioning system that is capable of both heating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ATMOS can be applied to modernization of legacy towed guns , incorporating advanced new technologies like INS , MVR , ballistic computers , C4I , hydraulics and electrical drives .
The Atmos 200 system uses all NATO standard 155mm ammunition .
The 155mm 52 calibre Atmos has demonstrated a maximum target range of 41km , using an Extended Range Full Bore Base Bleed ( ERFB-BB ) projectile .
The range using a NATO L15 high explosive projectile is 30km .
Atmos also fires the older standard M107 High Explosive projectile and has a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 27 projectiles and charges .
Its main combat tasks include neutralization of sheltered and unsheltered enemy war materiel ( including amour material ) , neutralization of enemy manpower , neutralization of fortified and non-fortified point and area targets .
The 155 mm ERFB long range artillery projectile family is representing a new generation of long-range artillery projectile designed for using with modern towed and self-propelled 155 mm weapons with 39 , 45 and 52 calibre barrel length .
The M02 155 mm ERFB/BB projectile design includes base bleed ( BB ) unit family @ @ @ @ @ @ @ using of efficient composite propellant charge .
With using of standard BB unit ( in production ) max .
range is reaching 42 km , while with more advanced BB unit max .
range is reaching of more than 44 km .
The artillery system is operated by a crew of four or six , including two loaders .
When the firing position site has been selected , two large hydraulically operated stabilisation spades are lowered at the rear of the vehicle on either side .
Target information is supplied by a surveillance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Atmos 2000 unit .
The computerized Advanced Fire and Control System ( AFCS ) fitted on the Atmos 2000 includes navigation and aiming systems and ballistic computation system .
The AFCS displays the target information , selects the gun traverse and elevation and lays the weapon on the target .
The weapon elevation and traverse is hydraulically operated .
The weapon system can also be operated manually .
Elbit officially announced , on March 29th 2019 , that it had been awarded a $ 125 million ( NIS 460 million ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to supply fully automatic self-propelled howitzer gun systems to the Israeli Defense Forces The contract , which also includes the supply of training simulators .
It will be performed over a 12-year period .
MORE ON THE TOPIC :

Support SouthFront
DEAR FRIENDS. IF YOU LIKE THIS TYPE OF CONTENT, SUPPORT SOUTHFRONT WORK: PayPal: southfront@list.ru, http://southfront.org/donate/ or via: https://www.patreon.com/southfront, BTC: 3Gbs4rjcVUtQd8p3CiFUCxPLZwRqurezRZ, BCH ABC: qpf2cphc5dkuclkqur7lhj2yuqq9pk3hmukle77vhq, ETH: 0x9f4cda013e354b8fc285bf4b9a60460cee7f7ea9
The Atmos 2000 155mm self-propelled howitzer is produced by Soltam Systems of Haifa, Israel.
The company is part of Elbit Systems.
The Atmos artillery system is available with 155mm 39, 45 and 52 calibre barrels.
The development and test phase of the program has been successfully completed and the system has entered full-scale production.
As an option, the Atmos 2000 155mm 45 calibres can also be equipped with a Russian 130mm M-46 gun.
The Atmos artillery system weighs 22,000kg. The system is transportable in a C-130 Hercules medium transport aircraft and does not require heavy equipment transporters in order to be relocated over long distances.
The Atmos 2000 began trials with the Israeli Defence Force in 2006.
The ATMOS can be mounted on any adapted high-mobility 6×6 or 8×8 truck chassis preferred by the customer.
The protected cabin of the ATMOS is designed for a crew of 2-6 personnel, a driver, a commander, and an additional three to four crew members along with all personal equipment and small arms.
The cabin is equipped with an air conditioning system that is capable of both heating and cooling.
The concept behind the ATMOS can be applied to modernization of legacy towed guns, incorporating advanced new technologies like INS, MVR, ballistic computers, C4I, hydraulics and electrical drives.
The Atmos 200 system uses all NATO standard 155mm ammunition.
The 155mm 52 calibre Atmos has demonstrated a maximum target range of 41km, using an Extended Range Full Bore Base Bleed (ERFB-BB) projectile. The range using a NATO L15 high explosive projectile is 30km. Atmos also fires the older standard M107 High Explosive projectile and has a range of 22km. Atmos 2000 carries 27 projectiles and charges.
Its main combat tasks include neutralization of sheltered and unsheltered enemy war materiel (including amour material), neutralization of enemy manpower, neutralization of fortified and non-fortified point and area targets.
The 155 mm ERFB long range artillery projectile family is representing a new generation of long-range artillery projectile designed for using with modern towed and self-propelled 155 mm weapons with 39, 45 and 52 calibre barrel length.
The M02 155 mm ERFB/BB projectile design includes base bleed (BB) unit family providinig important range increase, due to using of efficient composite propellant charge. With using of standard BB unit (in production) max. range is reaching 42 km, while with more advanced BB unit max. range is reaching of more than 44 km.
The artillery system is operated by a crew of four or six, including two loaders.
When the firing position site has been selected, two large hydraulically operated stabilisation spades are lowered at the rear of the vehicle on either side.
Target information is supplied by a surveillance patrol or by a Forward Observation Officer to the Atmos 2000 unit. The computerized Advanced Fire and Control System (AFCS) fitted on the Atmos 2000 includes navigation and aiming systems and ballistic computation system.
The AFCS displays the target information, selects the gun traverse and elevation and lays the weapon on the target. The weapon elevation and traverse is hydraulically operated. The weapon system can also be operated manually.
Elbit officially announced, on March 29th 2019, that it had been awarded a $125 million (NIS 460 million) contract from the Israeli Ministry of Defense to supply fully automatic self-propelled howitzer gun systems to the Israeli Defense Forces The contract, which also includes the supply of training simulators. It will be performed over a 12-year period.
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
Support SouthFront


southfront--2020-10-22--Putin: Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict Started With Brutal Crimes Against Armenian People

Nagorno-Karabakh conflict started with “ brutal crimes ” against Armenian people , Russia ’ s President Vladimir Putin said on October 22 in a televised speech in “ Valday ” Discussion Club .
“ This conflict started not as an interstate conflict or a struggle for territories , but as an ethnic confrontation , ” the Public Radio of Armenia quoted the Russian President as saying , “ unfortunately , this is a fact when cruel crimes were committed against the Armenian people in Sumgait and then in Nagorno-Karabakh.
” Putin added that no one is interested in the settlement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Moreover , he noted that Russia doesn ’ t share Turkey ’ s stand on the issue .
The Russian President also revealed that almost 5,000 people have died since the outbreak of the clashes in Nagorno-Karabakh on September 27 .
Putin said he is in constant communication with both Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Azerbaijan ’ s President Ilham Aliyev .
The Russian capital , Moscow , is hosting direct talks between the foreign ministers of Armenian and Azerbaijan .
Two humanitarian ceasefires have been agreed upon , thus far @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Russia is playing a leading role in Nagorno-Karabakh peace talks .
Nevertheless , a settlement doesn ’ t appear to be near .
MORE ON THIS TOPIC : • More Than 30 Killed In Fierce Battle With ISIS In Syria ’ s Eastern Hama • Syrian Army , SDF Repelled Another Turkish Attack On Ain Issa In Northern Raqqa ( Videos )

Support SouthFront
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict started with “brutal crimes” against Armenian people, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin said on October 22 in a televised speech in “Valday” Discussion Club.
“This conflict started not as an interstate conflict or a struggle for territories, but as an ethnic confrontation,” the Public Radio of Armenia quoted the Russian President as saying, “unfortunately, this is a fact when cruel crimes were committed against the Armenian people in Sumgait and then in Nagorno-Karabakh.”
Putin added that no one is interested in the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict more than Russia. Moreover, he noted that Russia doesn’t share Turkey’s stand on the issue.
The Russian President also revealed that almost 5,000 people have died since the outbreak of the clashes in Nagorno-Karabakh on September 27.
“According to our data, the number of deaths on both sides is almost 2,000, the total number of deaths is already nearing 5,000,” Putin said.
Putin said he is in constant communication with both Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan and Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev.
The Russian capital, Moscow, is hosting direct talks between the foreign ministers of Armenian and Azerbaijan. Two humanitarian ceasefires have been agreed upon, thus far. Both collapsed within a few days.
Russia is playing a leading role in Nagorno-Karabakh peace talks. Nevertheless, a settlement doesn’t appear to be near.
MORE ON THIS TOPIC:
Support SouthFront


southfront--2020-10-22--Armenians Claim They Shot Down Another Bayraktar TB2 Over Nagorno-Karabakh (Video, Photos)

The Ministry of Defense of Armenia announced on October 22 that a Turkish-made Bayraktar TB2 combat drown had been shot down over the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh .
The ministry released a video and several photos of the drone , which was apparently armed with several MAM-L laser-guided munitions .
The photos are yet to be verified .
Armenian Forces claimed to shot down a number of Bayraktar TB2 drones over Nagorno-Karabakh since September 27 .
Highly likely , the Armenian side used the photos of the drones that were shot down on October 20 to claim a new shot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the same .
Earlier the Armenian side already repeatedly showed same vestiges of An-2 to claim multiple aircraft shot down .
Azerbaijan purchased an unknown number of Bayraktar TB2 combat drones from Turkey ’ s Baykar in June .
The drones have been used to attack Armenian personnel and equipment in Nagorno-Karabakh with great success .
Armenian forces are certainly using one of their more advanced air-defense systems , like the S-300PM , the Buk-M1 or the Tor-M2KM .
If Armenian forces manage to neutralize the threat of Azerbaijan ’ s combat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may shift dramatically .
MORE ON THIS TOPIC :

Support SouthFront
The Ministry of Defense of Armenia announced on October 22 that a Turkish-made Bayraktar TB2 combat drown had been shot down over the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh.
The ministry released a video and several photos of the drone, which was apparently armed with several MAM-L laser-guided munitions. The photos are yet to be verified.
The Air Defense Forces of @Karabakh_MoD destroyed another Turkish “Bayraktar”
Силы ПВО Армии обороны уничтожили очередной “Байрактар” турецкого производства#NKpeace#ArtsakhStrong pic.twitter.com/SGoq7e21VL — Armenian Unified Infocenter (@ArmenianUnified) October 22, 2020
Armenian Forces claimed to shot down a number of Bayraktar TB2 drones over Nagorno-Karabakh since September 27.
Highly likely, the Armenian side used the photos of the drones that were shot down on October 20 to claim a new shot. The area of two alleged accidents is the same.
Earlier the Armenian side already repeatedly showed same vestiges of An-2 to claim multiple aircraft shot down.
Azerbaijan purchased an unknown number of Bayraktar TB2 combat drones from Turkey’s Baykar in June. The drones have been used to attack Armenian personnel and equipment in Nagorno-Karabakh with great success.
Armenian forces are certainly using one of their more advanced air-defense systems, like the S-300PM, the Buk-M1 or the Tor-M2KM.
If Armenian forces manage to neutralize the threat of Azerbaijan’s combat drones, the tide of Nagorno-Karabakh battle may shift dramatically.
MORE ON THIS TOPIC:
Support SouthFront