southfront--2020-06-01--The Saker: “Did Trump Just Cancel a Potential Double-War?”

Written by The Saker ; Originally appeared at The Unz Review At this time of writing , it is too early to declare the danger over , but at least three out of five Iranian tankers have made it safely to Venezuela ( confirmation from and ) .
Furthermore , while we should never say “ never ” , it appears exceedingly unlikely that the US would let three tankers pass only to then try to impede the arrival of the other two .
So it ain ’ t over until its over , but as of right now things @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Besides , this is mostly a symbolic issue .
While these 5 tankers will make a difference , it won ’ t be a huge one , especially considering the devastating consequences which the US sanctions , sabotage and subversion have inflicted on Venezuela .
Still , symbols are important , if only because they create a precedent .
In fact , I would argue that the latest climbdown by Trump is no different than all his other climbdowns : Trump has had a very consistent record of threatening fire and brimstone before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he did that many times now , we have to wonder whether this strategy is effective or not ?
One could argue that this strategy could be described by saying that you put the maximum pressure on the other side in the hope that the bluff will entice the adversary to fold .
This could be a semi-credible argument where it not for a very simple but crucial problem : so far the other guys have never folded .
In other words , Trump ’ s bluff has been called over and over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to quietly deflate .
Some will say that this only proves that Trump is truly a peace-loving President who , unlike his predecessors , does not want to go to war .
But then , what about the cruise missile strikes on Syria ?
What about the murder of Soleimani ?
Truth be told , the kindest thing we can say about this strategy ( assuming that it is a strategy to begin with , not the evidence of a total lack of one ) is that it is tantamount to yelling “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ theater : the fact that Trump did not set any movie theater ablaze hardly justifies his yelling “ fire ” in such a dangerous environment .
The perfect example of this kind of irresponsible behavior is the murder of General Soleimani which truly brought the US and Iran a millimeter away from a real , full-scale war .
Furthermore , while I salute Trump ’ s climbing down following the Iranian strikes , I also believe that in doing so he hurt the international image of the US .
Why ?
Think about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ever ( if I am not mistaken ) that the US was the object of a major military strike coming from another state-actor and did not retaliate .
In the past and until this Spring , the US always held the view that if anybody dares to mess with it this would result in very serious consequences .
Thus the US upheld a world order in which some where a lot more equal than others .
Specifically , “ others ” had to meekly accept US strikes and shut up whereas Uncle Shmuel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no retaliation .
By “ accepting ” the Iranian counter-strike , Trump did essentially place an “ equal ” sign between Iran and the US .
He probably never understood that , but in the region this was understood by all .
Just as Hezbollah destroyed the myth of Israeli impunity , Iran destroyed the myth of US impunity .
Still , I will always prefer the politician who does not start a war ( for whatever reason ) to one who would .
I also have no doubt whatsoever that Hillary would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , wars .
But the fact that Hillary would have been even worse than Trump is hardly a reason to start fawning about Trump ’ s brilliant “ 5D chess ” genius or peace-loving policies… Trump reminds of a guy pointing a gun a people in the street only to later say “ but it was a toy gun , I never meant to really shoot anybody ” .
This is definitely better than shooting people with a real gun , but this is hardly a sign of maturity or intelligence .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( let ’ s assume for argument ’ s sake that this is a strategy of some kind ) : each time the “ indispensable nation ” and “ sole hyperpower ” has to climb down , it increasingly looks like a paper tiger .
Not looking like such a paper tiger is probably the mean reason behind “ Every ten years or so , the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall , just to show the world we mean business “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sense , Ledeen ’ s strategy makes a lot more sense than what Trump has been doing .
As Marx famously said , “ History repeats itself , first as tragedy , second as farce “ .
The outcome of what some now call the “ Battle of Macuto Bay ” is a perfect example of this : if the Bay of Pigs was the “ root case ” then the disaster in Grenada was the tragedy and the Battle of Macuto Bay the real farce .
Humor can be a devastating weapon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Soviet Union ( in the late Brezhnev years and after ) knows how the Russian people ridiculed the Soviet leaders with literally thousands of jokes .
A real imperialist would much rather be hated than ridiculed , and while Trump himself probably does not realize that he is the laughingstock of the planet , his aides and deep state bosses most definitely do and that is very , very dangerous .
Because the pressure to , once again , “ pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ my article “ Each “ Click ” Brings Us One Step Closer to the “ Bang !
” for a fuller discussion of this ) .
Besides , finding an even smaller and weaker country than Venezuela will be hard ( maybe the ?
or Grenada again ?
who knows ? )
.
And potentially very dangerous .
The other problem is predictability .
Any international system requires that its most powerful actors be predictable .
In contrast , when a major international actors acts in what appears to be unpredictable , irrational @ @ @ @ @ @ @ entire stability of the system at risk .
This , by the way , is also why it is so disastrous that the US has withdrawn from so many international organizations or treaties : the participation in international organizations and treaties indicate that the US is willing to play by the same rules as everybody else .
The fact that the US is ditching so many of its former international obligations only shows that the US has gone rogue and is from now on totally unpredictable .
Finally , there are also lessons @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being that when confronted with a determined adversary , the Empire tries to bluff , but eventually folds .
True , Moscow has to be much more careful than Tehran simply because the consequences of a US-Russian war would be dramatically worse than even a major conflict in the Middle-East .
Yet it is also true that over the past years the Russian armed forces did have the time to prepare for such a conflict and that now Russia is ready for pretty much anything the US could try to throw at her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In contrast to the military posture of Russia , the political environment in Russia has changed for the worse : there is now a potentially very dangerous “ hardline ” opposition to Putin which I have christened the “ 6th column ” , as opposed to the liberal and pro-western 5th column .
What these two “ columns ” have in common is that they both will categorically oppose pretty much anything and everything Putin does .
The 6th column , in particular , has a seething hatred for Putin which is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 5th column usually express .
Check out , who prefers the term “ emo-Marxists ” and who very accurately describes these folks .
Whether we think of them as 6th-columnists or emo-Marxists does not matter , what matters is that these folks are eager to act like a soundboard for any and all anti-Putin rumors and fakes .
While Putin certainly has his flaws , and while the economic policies of the Medvedev , and now Mishustin , government are a far cry from what most Russians would want , it is also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are objectively doing the bidding of the Empire , which could present a real problem if the current pandemic-induced economic crisis in Russia is not tackled more effectively by the government .
I have always said that Iran , while being much weaker than Russia , has consistently shown much more courage in its dealings with the Empire than Russia .
Furthermore , Iran ’ s policies are primarily dictated by moral and spiritual considerations ( like in the case of Iran ’ s principled stance on occupied Palestine ) while Russian policies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which is really a euphemism for self-serving ) .
But then , Iran is an Islamic Republic whereas Russia still has to develop some kind of unifying and original worldview .
For all his innumerable negative character traits and other flaws , it remains true that Trump has not launched a major war ( so far ) .
Yes , he has brought the world to the brink several times , but so far he has not plunged the world into a major conflict .
How much of the credit for this truly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ debatable ( maybe cooler heads in the military prevailed , I think of folks like General Mattis who , reportedly , was the one who stopped the US from seriously attacking Syria and settled for a symbolic strike ) .
Some Russian analysts ( Andrei Sidorov ) even believe that the US is in no condition to fight any war , no matter how small .
Furthermore , most ( all ? )
Russian analysts also believe that the US is fully committed to a full-spectrum information and economic war to try to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I think that it would be fair to say that nobody in Russia believes that the relationship with Trump ’ s US can , or will , improve .
The tone in China is also changing , especially since the US has now launched a major anti-China strategic PSYOP .
In other words , the US is merrily continuing down its current road which leads it to a simultaneous confrontation with not one , or even two , countries , but with a list of countries which seems to grow every day .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ this case Trump appears to have canceled two wars , we should not assume that he won ’ t soon start one , if only to deflect the blame for his total mismanagement of the COVID19 crisis .
Should that happen , we can only hope that all the “ resistance countries ” and movement will provide as much support as possible to whomever the Empire attacks next .
MORE ON THE TOPIC : • US Charges Former Member Of Venezuela ’ s National Assembly With ‘ Narcoterrorism ’

Support SouthFront
Written by The Saker; Originally appeared at The Unz Review
At this time of writing, it is too early to declare the danger over, but at least three out of five Iranian tankers have made it safely to Venezuela (confirmation from TeleSur and PressTV ). Furthermore, while we should never say “never”, it appears exceedingly unlikely that the US would let three tankers pass only to then try to impede the arrival of the other two. So it ain’t over until its over, but as of right now things look way better than last week.
Besides, this is mostly a symbolic issue. While these 5 tankers will make a difference, it won’t be a huge one, especially considering the devastating consequences which the US sanctions, sabotage and subversion have inflicted on Venezuela.
Still, symbols are important, if only because they create a precedent. In fact, I would argue that the latest climbdown by Trump is no different than all his other climbdowns: Trump has had a very consistent record of threatening fire and brimstone before quietly deflating walking away. And since he did that many times now, we have to wonder whether this strategy is effective or not?
One could argue that this strategy could be described by saying that you put the maximum pressure on the other side in the hope that the bluff will entice the adversary to fold. This could be a semi-credible argument where it not for a very simple but crucial problem: so far the other guys have never folded. In other words, Trump’s bluff has been called over and over again, and each time Trump had to quietly deflate.
Some will say that this only proves that Trump is truly a peace-loving President who, unlike his predecessors, does not want to go to war. But then, what about the cruise missile strikes on Syria? What about the murder of Soleimani?
Truth be told, the kindest thing we can say about this strategy (assuming that it is a strategy to begin with, not the evidence of a total lack of one) is that it is tantamount to yelling “fire!” in a crowded movie theater: the fact that Trump did not set any movie theater ablaze hardly justifies his yelling “fire” in such a dangerous environment. The perfect example of this kind of irresponsible behavior is the murder of General Soleimani which truly brought the US and Iran a millimeter away from a real, full-scale war.
Furthermore, while I salute Trump’s climbing down following the Iranian strikes, I also believe that in doing so he hurt the international image of the US. Why? Think about this: this is the first time ever (if I am not mistaken) that the US was the object of a major military strike coming from another state-actor and did not retaliate. In the past and until this Spring, the US always held the view that if anybody dares to mess with it this would result in very serious consequences. Thus the US upheld a world order in which some where a lot more equal than others. Specifically, “others” had to meekly accept US strikes and shut up whereas Uncle Shmuel could strike left and right and expect no retaliation.
By “accepting” the Iranian counter-strike, Trump did essentially place an “equal” sign between Iran and the US. He probably never understood that, but in the region this was understood by all.
Just as Hezbollah destroyed the myth of Israeli impunity, Iran destroyed the myth of US impunity.
Still, I will always prefer the politician who does not start a war (for whatever reason) to one who would. I also have no doubt whatsoever that Hillary would have started one, or even several, wars. But the fact that Hillary would have been even worse than Trump is hardly a reason to start fawning about Trump’s brilliant “5D chess” genius or peace-loving policies…
Trump reminds of a guy pointing a gun a people in the street only to later say “but it was a toy gun, I never meant to really shoot anybody”. This is definitely better than shooting people with a real gun, but this is hardly a sign of maturity or intelligence.
The other problem with this “strategy” (let’s assume for argument’s sake that this is a strategy of some kind): each time the “indispensable nation” and “sole hyperpower” has to climb down, it increasingly looks like a paper tiger. Not looking like such a paper tiger is probably the mean reason behind Michael Ledeen’s famous words “Every ten years or so, the United States needs to pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business“. In a strictly evil and imperialistic sense, Ledeen’s strategy makes a lot more sense than what Trump has been doing.
As Marx famously said, “History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce“. The outcome of what some now call the “Battle of Macuto Bay” is a perfect example of this: if the Bay of Pigs was the “root case” then the disaster in Grenada was the tragedy and the Battle of Macuto Bay the real farce.
Humor can be a devastating weapon and anybody who has studied the late Soviet Union (in the late Brezhnev years and after) knows how the Russian people ridiculed the Soviet leaders with literally thousands of jokes.
A real imperialist would much rather be hated than ridiculed, and while Trump himself probably does not realize that he is the laughingstock of the planet, his aides and deep state bosses most definitely do and that is very, very dangerous.
Why?
Because the pressure to, once again, “ pick up some small crappy little country and throw it against the wall” increases with each climbdown (see my article “Each “Click” Brings Us One Step Closer to the “Bang!” for a fuller discussion of this).
Besides, finding an even smaller and weaker country than Venezuela will be hard (maybe the Island of Saba ? or Grenada again? who knows?). And potentially very dangerous.
The other problem is predictability. Any international system requires that its most powerful actors be predictable. In contrast, when a major international actors acts in what appears to be unpredictable, irrational or irresponsible manner, this puts the entire stability of the system at risk.
This, by the way, is also why it is so disastrous that the US has withdrawn from so many international organizations or treaties: the participation in international organizations and treaties indicate that the US is willing to play by the same rules as everybody else. The fact that the US is ditching so many of its former international obligations only shows that the US has gone rogue and is from now on totally unpredictable.
Finally, there are also lessons for Moscow here, the main one being that when confronted with a determined adversary, the Empire tries to bluff, but eventually folds. True, Moscow has to be much more careful than Tehran simply because the consequences of a US-Russian war would be dramatically worse than even a major conflict in the Middle-East. Yet it is also true that over the past years the Russian armed forces did have the time to prepare for such a conflict and that now Russia is ready for pretty much anything the US could try to throw at her, at least in purely military terms.
In contrast to the military posture of Russia, the political environment in Russia has changed for the worse: there is now a potentially very dangerous “hardline” opposition to Putin which I have christened the “6th column”, as opposed to the liberal and pro-western 5th column. What these two “columns” have in common is that they both will categorically oppose pretty much anything and everything Putin does. The 6th column, in particular, has a seething hatred for Putin which is even more rabid than what the liberal 5th column usually express. Check out this excellent video by Ruslan Ostashko , who prefers the term “emo-Marxists” and who very accurately describes these folks. Whether we think of them as 6th-columnists or emo-Marxists does not matter, what matters is that these folks are eager to act like a soundboard for any and all anti-Putin rumors and fakes. While Putin certainly has his flaws, and while the economic policies of the Medvedev, and now Mishustin, government are a far cry from what most Russians would want, it is also true that these two “columns” are objectively doing the bidding of the Empire, which could present a real problem if the current pandemic-induced economic crisis in Russia is not tackled more effectively by the government.
I have always said that Iran, while being much weaker than Russia, has consistently shown much more courage in its dealings with the Empire than Russia. Furthermore, Iran’s policies are primarily dictated by moral and spiritual considerations (like in the case of Iran’s principled stance on occupied Palestine) while Russian policies are much more “pragmatic” (which is really a euphemism for self-serving). But then, Iran is an Islamic Republic whereas Russia still has to develop some kind of unifying and original worldview.
Conclusion:
For all his innumerable negative character traits and other flaws, it remains true that Trump has not launched a major war (so far). Yes, he has brought the world to the brink several times, but so far he has not plunged the world into a major conflict. How much of the credit for this truly should go personally to him is very debatable (maybe cooler heads in the military prevailed, I think of folks like General Mattis who, reportedly, was the one who stopped the US from seriously attacking Syria and settled for a symbolic strike). Some Russian analysts (Andrei Sidorov) even believe that the US is in no condition to fight any war, no matter how small. Furthermore, most (all?) Russian analysts also believe that the US is fully committed to a full-spectrum information and economic war to try to economically strangle both Russia and China. I think that it would be fair to say that nobody in Russia believes that the relationship with Trump’s US can, or will, improve. The tone in China is also changing, especially since the US has now launched a major anti-China strategic PSYOP . In other words, the US is merrily continuing down its current road which leads it to a simultaneous confrontation with not one, or even two, countries, but with a list of countries which seems to grow every day. So while it is true that in this case Trump appears to have canceled two wars, we should not assume that he won’t soon start one, if only to deflect the blame for his total mismanagement of the COVID19 crisis. Should that happen, we can only hope that all the “resistance countries” and movement will provide as much support as possible to whomever the Empire attacks next.
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
Support SouthFront


southfront--2020-06-01--4th Division Service Member Assassinated In Syria’s Daraa

On May 31 , unidentified gunmen assassinated a soldier of the Syrian Arab Army ( SAA ) in Daraa ’ s city center , in the country ’ s southern region .
Hassan Fahd Najm al-Khaldi was shot and killed near the National Hospital in the northern part of Daraa city , commonly referred to as “ Daraa al-Mahata.
” Pro-government sources said al-Khaldi ’ s body received a large number of gunshots .
Al-Khaldi , originally from the town of Tell Shihab in northwest Daraa , was reportedly serving in the ranks of the SAA ’ s 4th Division @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dead bodies of two relatives , Taha Mousa al-Sa ’ di and Hail Mohamad al-Sa ’ idi , were found near the town of Nawa in northern Daraa .
The two men were tortured and then executed by unidentified gunmen .
A series of attacks targeted Syrian service members and ex-rebels in Daraa during the last few months .
ISIS claimed responsibility for some of them .
The SAA is reportedly preparing to carry out a large-scale security operation in Daraa , possibly in cooperation with ex-rebels .
Two days ago , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ northeastern countryside as part of the ongoing preparations for the operation .
MORE ON THIS TOPIC :

Support SouthFront
On May 31, unidentified gunmen assassinated a soldier of the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) in Daraa’s city center, in the country’s southern region.
Hassan Fahd Najm al-Khaldi was shot and killed near the National Hospital in the northern part of Daraa city, commonly referred to as “Daraa al-Mahata.” Pro-government sources said al-Khaldi’s body received a large number of gunshots.
Al-Khaldi, originally from the town of Tell Shihab in northwest Daraa, was reportedly serving in the ranks of the SAA’s 4th Division.
In a separate incident, the dead bodies of two relatives, Taha Mousa al-Sa’di and Hail Mohamad al-Sa’idi, were found near the town of Nawa in northern Daraa. The two men were tortured and then executed by unidentified gunmen.
A series of attacks targeted Syrian service members and ex-rebels in Daraa during the last few months. ISIS claimed responsibility for some of them.
The SAA is reportedly preparing to carry out a large-scale security operation in Daraa, possibly in cooperation with ex-rebels. Two days ago, the 4th Division established several checkpoints in the northeastern countryside as part of the ongoing preparations for the operation.
MORE ON THIS TOPIC:
Support SouthFront


southfront--2020-06-01--Last Day Until End Of May

Last Day Until End Of May

This month SouthFront has faced unprecedented technical and media pressure .
Our main YouTube channel and Facebook page each with @ @ @ @ @ were both deleted .
Despite the increasing pressure , SouthFront continues its work and has @ @ @ @ @ content released on the website .
All SouthFront videos can also be found there .
@ @ @ @ @ not be possible without your help .
LAST UNTIL THE END OF MAY Since May @ @ @ @ @ 3,625 USD .
This is 70.5 % of the monthly budget needed to keep SouthFront @ @ @ @ @ THIS HARD TIME , YOUR SUPPORT IS ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT TO KEEP SOUTHFRONT ALIVE : Donate @ @ @ @ @ Paysafecard , Bitcoin and other options .
This systems accepts all types of cards , @ @ @ @ @ bitcoin ( FAQ is under the main text , in P.S . )
You can @ @ @ @ @ of $ 15 ( or any another amount ) OR make one time donation by @ @ @

Support SouthFront
DEAR FRIENDS,
This month SouthFront has faced unprecedented technical and media pressure. Our main YouTube channel and Facebook page each with hundreds of thousands of subscribers were both deleted.
Despite the increasing pressure, SouthFront continues its work and has even expanded the amount of content released on the website. All SouthFront videos can also be found there. However, all this will not be possible without your help.
LAST UNTIL THE END OF MAY
Since May 1, SouthFront has collected 3,625 USD. This is 70.5% of the monthly budget needed to keep SouthFront working and further.
IN THIS HARD TIME, YOUR SUPPORT IS ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT TO KEEP SOUTHFRONT ALIVE:
PayPal
Account: southfront@list.ru
DonationAlerts
Donate via VISA, PayPal, Paysafecard, Bitcoin and other options.
Tinypass (Piano)
This systems accepts all types of cards, PayPal, Amazon Payments, bitcoin (FAQ is under the main text, in P.S.)
You can subscribe for a monthly donation of $15 (or any another amount) OR make one time donation by clicking buttons below
Patreon
Donate via SouthFront’s Patreon account (click here)
SouthFront: Analysis & Intelligence Team
Support SouthFront


southfront--2020-06-01--U.S. Strategic Bombers Trained Strikes On Territory Of Russia When They Were Intercepted By Fighter

U.S. Strategic Bombers Trained Strikes On Territory Of Russia When They Were Intercepted By Fighter Jets Over Black Sea

On May 29 , Russian fighters jets intercepted a group of US strategic bombers over the Black Sea .
On June 1 , the Russian Defense Ministry published an official report on the recent comments by Chief Chief of the Main Operational Directorate of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces regarding the increase of the NATO activity near the Russian territory .
Chief of the Main Operational Directorate of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces held a briefing on the level of NATO activity near the borders of Russia ( source ) : Colonel-General Sergei Rudskoy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the General Staff ( MOD GS ) of the Russian Armed Forces , gave a briefing on the level of military activity of the United States and its NATO allies near the Russian borders .
He noted that despite the spread of a new coronavirus infection , there is a significant increase in the number of combat training activities of the alliance ’ s troops , which have a clear anti-Russian orientation .
The largest of them was the “ Defender of Europe 2020 ” series of exercises .
Sergei Rudskoy stressed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clearly anti-Russian .
For example , during these events , amphibious operations in the Baltic states and the Caucasus were planned to take place on the eve of May 9 .
This did not happen only because of the quarantine measures .
Almost all combat training tasks were performed at training grounds located in the immediate vicinity of the Russian borders .
Objects located on the territory of the Russian Federation are considered as probable targets for destruction.
” In addition , in preparation for “ Defender of Europe 2020 ” , attempts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Vienna document by splitting a large exercise into smaller ones and involving neutral states in maneuvers .
The Chief of MOD GS of the Russian Armed Forces also added that the activity of the US air and naval forces and their allies near the Russian borders has increased sharply .
So , in April of this year , a flight of B-1B strategic bomber aircraft was carried out along the Kamchatka peninsula , and in May five such flights were recorded : on May 6-over the territory of Estonia and the Baltic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the territory of Lithuania and the Baltic sea , on May 20 — over the territories of Sweden and Norway , on May 22 — another flight near the Kamchatka peninsula , on May 29 — over the territory of Ukraine and the Black sea .
It should be noted that B-1B bombers appeared over Ukraine for the first time .
In addition , the Chief of MOD GS of the Russian Armed Forces noted that NATO ’ s activities are becoming more active in the Arctic .
For the first time since @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” , on the eve of the 75th anniversary of the Victory over Nazi Germany in the Barents sea , a detachment of warships of the united naval forces of NATO held exercises .
It consisted of three US DDG destroyers , which are the basis of the maritime component of the European segment of the global US missile defense system .
In addition , this campaign involved a nuclear-powered submarine and a universal supply transport of the US Navy , as well as the British Navy ’ s DDG frigate .
During @ @ @ @ @ @ @ objects on the territory of the Russian Federation and intercepting Russian ballistic missiles were worked out .
He also noted that the active actions of the Northern fleet , the deployment of NATO ships was detected in a timely manner , and their direct support and tracking of weapons was organized .
This made it possible to avoid incidents and demonstrated the determination of the Russian Federation to protect its interests in the Arctic .
Over the eastern Mediterranean , the US Navy planes of the type “ Poseidon ” systematically approaching the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Colonel-General Sergei Rudskoy stressed that such actions by the United States and its allies , hiding behind a far-fetched threat of “ Russian aggression ” , continue to destroy the existing security system in Europe .
Work continues to build up the ABM infrastructure in Poland in addition to the US-deployed facility in Romania .
All concerns regarding the possible deployment of Tomahawk cruise missiles at these bases remain .
In addition , the Globus-3 radar station in Northern Norway , in the village of Vardo , is continuing to modernize its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to monitor the interior of the Russian territory .
Today , when the world ’ s efforts are focused on countering the spread of a new coronavirus infection , it is necessary to reduce the level of confrontation , to refrain from aggressive actions and the demonstration of strength .
In February of this year , at a meeting with the Supreme Allied Commander-in-Chief , General Todd Walters , the Russian side once again recalled its initiative to transfer areas of major operational and combat training activities deep into the territory of border @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reduce military tension and prevent incidents were set forth in a letter from Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov to NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg .
In fact , our suggestions were ignored .
“ We will continue the course towards de-escalation of the situation in Europe .
This year , the Armed Forces do not provide for large-scale exercises near the borders of NATO member countries .
Large-scale actions in the framework of the Caucasus-2020 strategic command-post exercise were moved inland .
In the future , we are ready to adjust the areas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the alliance .
In order to specify steps to eliminate sensitive incidents during aircraft and naval operations , we are ready to fix joint rules that determine the minimum distance of approach of aircraft and ships , as well as the interaction between crews .
We attach fundamental importance to the practical implementation of the initiative on the mutual use of transponders when flying combat aircraft in the Baltic .
We look forward for the readiness of the NATO countries for concrete decisions on this issue .
The Armed Forces of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ situation and military activity of NATO near the Russian borders in order to take timely measures to ensure the security of the Russian Federation and prevent incidents , ” concluded Colonel General Sergei Rudskoy .
MORE ON THE TOPIC :

Support SouthFront
On May 29, Russian fighters jets intercepted a group of US strategic bombers over the Black Sea. On June 1, the Russian Defense Ministry published an official report on the recent comments by Chief Chief of the Main Operational Directorate of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces regarding the increase of the NATO activity near the Russian territory.
Chief of the Main Operational Directorate of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces held a briefing on the level of NATO activity near the borders of Russia (source):
Colonel-General Sergei Rudskoy, Chief of the Main Operational Directorate of the General Staff (MOD GS) of the Russian Armed Forces, gave a briefing on the level of military activity of the United States and its NATO allies near the Russian borders.
“The Ministry of Defenсe of the Russian Federation constantly monitors and records the high level of military activity of the United States and its NATO allies near our borders,” said Sergey Rudskoy.
He noted that despite the spread of a new coronavirus infection, there is a significant increase in the number of combat training activities of the alliance’s troops, which have a clear anti-Russian orientation. The largest of them was the “Defender of Europe 2020” series of exercises.
“Let me remind you that they provided for the transfer of a contingent of US troops from the continental United States to Europe. The US side planned to use more than 28,000 troops, 287 tanks, 449 armored personnel carriers and 95 helicopters in the exercises. – said the head of MOD GS. “Another 17 countries planned to form their own contingents of troops, and from the joint Armed Forces of NATO in Europe — to attract five multinational associations.”
Sergei Rudskoy stressed that the focus of the exercise is clearly anti-Russian. For example, during these events, amphibious operations in the Baltic states and the Caucasus were planned to take place on the eve of May 9. This did not happen only because of the quarantine measures.
Almost all combat training tasks were performed at training grounds located in the immediate vicinity of the Russian borders. Objects located on the territory of the Russian Federation are considered as probable targets for destruction.”
In addition, in preparation for “Defender of Europe 2020”, attempts were made to circumvent the provisions of the Vienna document by splitting a large exercise into smaller ones and involving neutral states in maneuvers.
The Chief of MOD GS of the Russian Armed Forces also added that the activity of the US air and naval forces and their allies near the Russian borders has increased sharply. So, in April of this year, a flight of B-1B strategic bomber aircraft was carried out along the Kamchatka peninsula, and in May five such flights were recorded: on May 6-over the territory of Estonia and the Baltic sea, on May 11 – over the territory of Lithuania and the Baltic sea, on May 20 — over the territories of Sweden and Norway, on May 22 — another flight near the Kamchatka peninsula, on May 29 — over the territory of Ukraine and the Black sea. It should be noted that B-1B bombers appeared over Ukraine for the first time.
“During these flights, US planes were approaching the border of the Kaliningrad region at a distance of up to 10 km,” said Sergey Rudskoy. — In all cases, our Air Defense systems detected strategic bombers in a timely manner, established continuous monitoring and implemented measures to prevent incidents. Seven lifts of air defense duty fighters were performed. Anti-aircraft missiles were ready for immediate action.”
In addition, the Chief of MOD GS of the Russian Armed Forces noted that NATO’s activities are becoming more active in the Arctic.
For the first time since the end of the “Cold War”, on the eve of the 75th anniversary of the Victory over Nazi Germany in the Barents sea, a detachment of warships of the united naval forces of NATO held exercises. It consisted of three US DDG destroyers, which are the basis of the maritime component of the European segment of the global US missile defense system.
In addition, this campaign involved a nuclear-powered submarine and a universal supply transport of the US Navy, as well as the British Navy’s DDG frigate.
During the exercise, the tasks of hitting objects on the territory of the Russian Federation and intercepting Russian ballistic missiles were worked out.
“We regard such actions as provocative, despite the fact that the US side has notified these ships in the Barents sea in the shortest possible time,” Sergei Rudskoy said.
He also noted that the active actions of the Northern fleet, the deployment of NATO ships was detected in a timely manner, and their direct support and tracking of weapons was organized. This made it possible to avoid incidents and demonstrated the determination of the Russian Federation to protect its interests in the Arctic.
“The intensity of aerial reconnaissance in the Baltic, Black and eastern part of Mediterranean seas has also increased. Over the past month, 10 reconnaissance aircraft have flown over the Baltic and six over the Black sea. An US RQ-4B strategic reconnaissance drone was detected over the territory of Georgia, ” Colonel-General Sergey Rudskoy added.
Over the eastern Mediterranean, the US Navy planes of the type “Poseidon” systematically approaching the Russian military bases in Hmeymim and Tartus.
“To prevent their aggressive reconnaissance actions, we are forced to raise the duty fighters in the air. If in April there were seven such cases, in May there were already 17. In other words, it has increased more than twice, — the Chief of MOD GS of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation gave data. — We regard such flights as contrary to the signed agreements on preventing incidents in Syrian airspace.”
Colonel-General Sergei Rudskoy stressed that such actions by the United States and its allies, hiding behind a far-fetched threat of “Russian aggression”, continue to destroy the existing security system in Europe.
“A significant increase in NATO military activity near the Russian borders was noted against the background of a possible American withdrawal from the Open Skies Treaty and earlier steps taken by Washington to destroy the INF Treaty,” said the Chief of MOD GS of the Russian Armed Forces.
Work continues to build up the ABM infrastructure in Poland in addition to the US-deployed facility in Romania. All concerns regarding the possible deployment of Tomahawk cruise missiles at these bases remain.
In addition, the Globus-3 radar station in Northern Norway, in the village of Vardo, is continuing to modernize its missile defence capabilities and expand its capabilities to monitor the interior of the Russian territory.
“In turn, the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation has always adhered to a course aimed at building a constructive dialogue with NATO,” said Sergei Rudskoy.
Today, when the world’s efforts are focused on countering the spread of a new coronavirus infection, it is necessary to reduce the level of confrontation, to refrain from aggressive actions and the demonstration of strength.
“During high-level bilateral contacts with the leadership of NATO, we repeatedly discussed issues of preventing incidents in the military sphere and reducing the intensity of training activities conducted near our borders,” said the Chief of MOD GS of the Russian Armed Forces. – Only in 2019–2020 did they rise as the Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, General of the Army Valery Gerasimov, in negotiations with the Supreme Allied Commander Europe, General Curtis Scaparroti and General Todd Walters, the chairmen of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Joseph Dunford and General Mark Milly , Chairman of the NATO Military Committee, Chief Air Marshal Stuart Peach.”
In February of this year, at a meeting with the Supreme Allied Commander-in-Chief, General Todd Walters, the Russian side once again recalled its initiative to transfer areas of major operational and combat training activities deep into the territory of border countries.
“All our proposals to reduce military tension and prevent incidents were set forth in a letter from Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov to NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg. In fact, our suggestions were ignored. “We will continue the course towards de-escalation of the situation in Europe. This year, the Armed Forces do not provide for large-scale exercises near the borders of NATO member countries. Large-scale actions in the framework of the Caucasus-2020 strategic command-post exercise were moved inland. In the future, we are ready to adjust the areas of the exercises on a parity basis with the alliance. In order to specify steps to eliminate sensitive incidents during aircraft and naval operations, we are ready to fix joint rules that determine the minimum distance of approach of aircraft and ships, as well as the interaction between crews. We attach fundamental importance to the practical implementation of the initiative on the mutual use of transponders when flying combat aircraft in the Baltic. We look forward for the readiness of the NATO countries for concrete decisions on this issue. The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation will continue to monitor the situation and military activity of NATO near the Russian borders in order to take timely measures to ensure the security of the Russian Federation and prevent incidents,” concluded Colonel General Sergei Rudskoy.
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
Support SouthFront


southfront--2020-06-01--Technical And Operational Sspects Of Robot Swarms: UNIDIR Report

The United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research ( UNIDIR ) has just released a report on “ Swarm Robotics : Technical and Operational Overview of the Next Generation of Autonomous Systems ” .
The objective of the report is to improve understanding of how lethal autonomous weapons systems ( LAWS ) operate , how they are managed and controlled during military operations , and implications for the development of international guiding principles and norms : “ As the international community continues discussions on lethal autonomous weapons systems ( LAWS ) in 2020 and 2021 and will focus on the further @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the role of human decision-making will undoubtedly remain one of the core issues .
By drawing on near-term technologies , such as swarms , and related command and control models in deliberations about human control and human-machine interaction , the international community can move to develop a more comprehensive understanding of how control may or may not be exercised in military practice – now and in future operations.
” LINK As international rivalries , reckless provocations and one-upmanship among the world ’ s superpowers and regional powers reach fever pitch , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is pushing military R & D programs far beyond the capabilities of supervision and rational debate over the possibly devastating consequences of the new technology .
“ The prospect of military swarms is real , although they are not yet operational and the technology is rather brittle .
Yet how to exercise effective and responsible levels of human involvement over swarms remains a nascent area of research .
The main challenges relate to the design and implementation of appropriate human-machine and machine-machine interactions .
Researchers and developers have taken numerous approaches to injecting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ involvement or control in the context of swarming typically refers to either command , control or coordination.
” The document envisages a wide range of potential military and intelligence applications , including intelligence , surveillance and reconnaissance operations , perimeter surveillance and protection , distributed attacks , air defence , force protection , deception , dull and dangerous tasks , and combatting other swarms .
MORE ON THE TOPIC : • A Swarm of Swarms : Toward Aerospace Warfare Model of the 21st Century

Support SouthFront
The United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR) has just released a report on “Swarm Robotics: Technical and Operational Overview of the Next Generation of Autonomous Systems”.
The objective of the report is to improve understanding of how lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) operate, how they are managed and controlled during military operations, and implications for the development of international guiding principles and norms:
“As the international community continues discussions on lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) in 2020 and 2021 and will focus on the further development and operationalization of the guiding principles, the role of human decision-making will undoubtedly remain one of the core issues. By drawing on near-term technologies, such as swarms, and related command and control models in deliberations about human control and human-machine interaction, the international community can move to develop a more comprehensive understanding of how control may or may not be exercised in military practice – now and in future operations.” LINK
As international rivalries, reckless provocations and one-upmanship among the world’s superpowers and regional powers reach fever pitch, the headlong rush to gain a strategic advantage is pushing military R&D programs far beyond the capabilities of supervision and rational debate over the possibly devastating consequences of the new technology.
“The prospect of military swarms is real, although they are not yet operational and the technology is rather brittle. Yet how to exercise effective and responsible levels of human involvement over swarms remains a nascent area of research. The main challenges relate to the design and implementation of appropriate human-machine and machine-machine interactions. Researchers and developers have taken numerous approaches to injecting human involvement into a swarm. Human involvement or control in the context of swarming typically refers to either command, control or coordination.”
The document envisages a wide range of potential military and intelligence applications, including intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance operations, perimeter surveillance and protection, distributed attacks, air defence, force protection, deception, dull and dangerous tasks, and combatting other swarms.
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
Support SouthFront


southfront--2020-06-01--Opposition Groups And Social Movements Condemn US Troop Deployment To Colombia

Senior members of the national Congress , opposition politicians and social movements are denouncing the announcement that the US is sending more troops to Colombia .
The troops are due to arrive today , 1 June , just days after the planned deployment was announced to the Colombian people by the US Embassy .
Among other controversial points , the deployment breaches the Constitutional requirements that all foreign military deployments must be approved by the Senate .
Following the announcement made by the United States Embassy about the imminent arrival of a Security Force Assistance Brigade to Colombia , several @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have asked the President of the Senate , Lidio García , to call an urgent meeting to debate the motives and objectives of their deployment .
According to Article 173 of the Colombian Constitution , it is a requirement that any presence of foreign troops in Colombian territory must be previously debated and authorized by the Senate .
Although according to authorities from both countries , the arrival of the United States Army Security Assistance Force on June 1 is intended to “ collaborate in the fight against drug trafficking , ” social @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bring with it an escalation of social and armed conflict in the territories as well as possible confrontations with other nations ( Venezuela in particular ) .
Some legislators described the arrival of troops as a “ very serious error ” by President Iván Duque , since it violates national sovereignty and the Constitution .
The President of the Colombian Senate , Lidio García Turbay , sent a message to President Iván Duque in his account on the social network Twitter , in which he writes that Article 173 establishes that “ allowing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ national territory is a constitutional attribution of the Senate of the Republic .
The decision has been rejected by several senators including Jorge Enrique Robledo , who described the arrival of troops as a “ very serious error ” by President Duque , as it violates national sovereignty and the Constitution .
The representative of the Alternative Democratic Pole , Antonio Sanguino , affirmed for his part that “ it is the most inopportune moment ” for the arrival of US troops , as the world is experiencing a health crisis due to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ hitting the country hard ” .
Sanguino warned that it is still unknown whether this decision is “ related to the United States ’ intention to continue applying hostile actions against neighbouring countries and against Venezuela , and aggravating the conflict we have had with Venezuela … Senator Iván Cepeda , for his part , maintained that the US intervention represents an “ attack on sovereignty ” , the peace process and constitutes a threat of an international war .
The Cumbre Agraria , Campesina , Etnica y Popular ( Agrarian , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , one of the main protagonists in the national strikes and blockades that have brought the country to a halt on numerous occasions over the last few years , also condemned the planned deployment : “ As another example of the country ’ s surrender to foreign interests , the anti-national government of Iván Duque announces the arrival in Colombia of the SBAF Mission , a US military brigade for the alleged purpose of combatting drug trafficking .
This decision is one more step in the direction of greater dependence of the Colombian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a severe blow to our national independence .
It also means greater involvement in the plans to attack the sister Republic of Venezuela , which have increased significantly in recent months .
The diligence and speed with which the executive obeys the orders of the United States is surprising , while it refuses to carry out any action aimed at joint work with the Venezuelan government to attend to the migrant population , the problem of the pandemic on the border and the government does not even take the trouble to recover the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ territory with the failed incursion of mercenaries… ” MORE ON THE TOPIC : • New Allegations Of Massive Corruption In Colombian Armed Forces And Threats Against Whistleblowers

Support SouthFront
Senior members of the national Congress, opposition politicians and social movements are denouncing the announcement that the US is sending more troops to Colombia. The troops are due to arrive today, 1 June, just days after the planned deployment was announced to the Colombian people by the US Embassy. Among other controversial points, the deployment breaches the Constitutional requirements that all foreign military deployments must be approved by the Senate.
Following the announcement made by the United States Embassy about the imminent arrival of a Security Force Assistance Brigade to Colombia, several sectors of the Congress of the Republic have asked the President of the Senate, Lidio García, to call an urgent meeting to debate the motives and objectives of their deployment.
Through her Twitter account, the senator of the Patriotic Union, Aida Avella questioned the intentions of the United States Army, “Mr. Minister of Defense, you can clarify to the country whether the US soldiers will be unarmed? According to their statements, they are being deployed to ‘advise’ us. Who do they think they are deceiving?”
According to Article 173 of the Colombian Constitution, it is a requirement that any presence of foreign troops in Colombian territory must be previously debated and authorized by the Senate.
Although according to authorities from both countries, the arrival of the United States Army Security Assistance Force on June 1 is intended to “collaborate in the fight against drug trafficking,” social organizations have warned that their arrival may bring with it an escalation of social and armed conflict in the territories as well as possible confrontations with other nations (Venezuela in particular).
Some legislators described the arrival of troops as a “very serious error” by President Iván Duque, since it violates national sovereignty and the Constitution.
The President of the Colombian Senate, Lidio García Turbay, sent a message to President Iván Duque in his account on the social network Twitter, in which he writes that Article 173 establishes that “allowing the transit of foreign troops” in national territory is a constitutional attribution of the Senate of the Republic.
The decision has been rejected by several senators including Jorge Enrique Robledo, who described the arrival of troops as a “very serious error” by President Duque, as it violates national sovereignty and the Constitution.
The representative of the Alternative Democratic Pole, Antonio Sanguino, affirmed for his part that “it is the most inopportune moment” for the arrival of US troops, as the world is experiencing a health crisis due to the Covid-19 pandemic, which is also “hitting the country hard”.
Sanguino warned that it is still unknown whether this decision is “related to the United States’ intention to continue applying hostile actions against neighbouring countries and against Venezuela, and aggravating the conflict we have had with Venezuela …
Senator Iván Cepeda, for his part, maintained that the US intervention represents an “attack on sovereignty”, the peace process and constitutes a threat of an international war.
“If you want to fight drug trafficking, you should investigate the role of ‘Uribismo’ in the political arena, and military commanders’ relations with the Gulf Clan and the Envigado Office (described in the Operation Bastón report). For this, hundreds of US military personnel are not required, but rather that the Office of the Prosecutor General fulfil its duties and obligations…”
The Cumbre Agraria, Campesina, Etnica y Popular (Agrarian, Farmers, Ethnic and Popular Summit), one of the main protagonists in the national strikes and blockades that have brought the country to a halt on numerous occasions over the last few years, also condemned the planned deployment:
“As another example of the country’s surrender to foreign interests, the anti-national government of Iván Duque announces the arrival in Colombia of the SBAF Mission, a US military brigade for the alleged purpose of combatting drug trafficking. This decision is one more step in the direction of greater dependence of the Colombian armed forces on North American guidelines and a severe blow to our national independence. It also means greater involvement in the plans to attack the sister Republic of Venezuela, which have increased significantly in recent months. The diligence and speed with which the executive obeys the orders of the United States is surprising, while it refuses to carry out any action aimed at joint work with the Venezuelan government to attend to the migrant population, the problem of the pandemic on the border and the government does not even take the trouble to recover the navy ships that coincidentally went to Venezuelan territory with the failed incursion of mercenaries…”
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
Support SouthFront


southfront--2020-06-01--US Plans To Send Troops To Tunisia To Counter Alleged Russian ‘Destabilizing’ Influence

The United States is considering sending a brigade of troops to Tunisia ‘ for training purposes ’ to counter the alleged ‘ Russian threat ’ to regional security , US African Command ( AFRICOM ) announced , following a telephone conversation on 28 May between AFRICOM Commander Gen. Stephen Townsend and Tunisian Defence Minister Imed Hazgui .
“ As Russia continues to fan the flames of the Libyan conflict , regional security in North Africa is a heightened concern .
We ’ re looking at new ways to address mutual security concerns with Tunisia , including the use of our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , his comments appearing in an AFRICOM press statement late Friday .
“ Tunisia is a prime example of how US support to our African partners aids long-term self-sufficiency , security and development .
Our relationship with Tunisia is centered on enhancing our partnership to achieve mutual security goals , ” the general added .
Moscow has repeatedly denied accusations of involvement in the Libyan civil war , stressing that it wants to see a diplomatic settlement in the war-torn country , and recalling that it was a NATO military intervention in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into a failed state .
LINK Behind the US ’ accusations there are clearly other motivations for expanding their military presence throughout Africa .
While it is quite likely that the US political , economic and military leadership is concerned by a possible Russian presence in some African countries , it has become increasingly apparent over the last decade that other ambitions and concerns have been driving the push to establish AFRICOM ( which occurred on 1 October 2008 ) and its subsequent expansion .
As far back as 28 May 2011 Global @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Southern Times on the US ’ efforts to secure access to strategic resources ( the original link is no longer operative ) .
The report reviews a study by Dr Stephen Burgess , a Zimbabwean-born associate professor at the US Air War College , which argues that Washington may have to enlist the services of the Department of Defence , the National Security Agency and the Africa Command ( AFRICOM ) to secure Southern Africa ’ s resources .
“ His study , titled ‘ Sustainability of Strategic Minerals in Southern Africa and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the US should move quickly to secure Southern Africa ’ s uranium , manganese , platinum , chrome , cobalt and rare earth minerals for America ’ s industrial needs and for its military as well as maintenance of weapons systems .
The study focuses on resource accessibility in the DRC , Namibia , South Africa , Zambia and Zimbabwe and draws parallels with the 1880s scramble for Africa .
To triumph in this new scramble , Burgess notes , ‘ all instruments of ( US ) power ’ must be deployed .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Zimbabwe – and makes recommendations on how the US can muscle out China .
He interviewed mining sector experts , government officials and journalists as part of his research .
There were also consultations with American institutions such as the Defence National Stock Pile Centre , the Defence Logistics Agency and the Marine Corps Command .
A note in the study indicates that it has nothing to do with the US Air War College , raising the possibility that Burgess was working as a consultant for Washington .
‘ Southern Africa contains strategic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allies require for industrial purposes and that militaries need for production and sustainment of weapons systems .
‘ The principal sustainability challenge in SADC for the USA and its allies is uncertain access to strategic minerals .
‘ The cause of this challenge is increasing global demand and supply shortages caused by inadequate infrastructure , politicization of the mining industry and China ’ s aggressive and sometimes monopolistic behaviour in pursuit of minerals .
‘ The challenge is most acute in two Southern African countries – South Africa and the Democratic Republic of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also growing in Zambia , Zimbabwe and Namibia .
‘ Of particular concern is possible future conflict between the United States , which needs strategic minerals for national defence and other purposes , and China , which needs an increasing amount of resources to fuel its accelerating industrialization .
‘ There is a rising scramble for and struggle over resources in Africa , especially in petroleum and mining economies .
‘ In particular , the US government is concerned about access to ‘ defence critical resources ’ .
This requires increased levels of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ using all the instruments of American power and working with American and Western mining companies , as well as engagement with China and Chinese companies… ” LINK The Black Alliance for Peace has made the abolition of AFRICOM one of its central demands for many years .
The Alliance states of AFRICOM : “ October 1 , 2018 marked 10 years since the United States African Command ( AFRICOM ) had been established .
The purpose of AFRICOM is to use U.S. military power to impose U.S. control of African land , resources @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. multi-national corporations and the wealthy in the United States .
When AFRICOM was established in the months before Barack Obama assumed office as the first Black President of the United States , a majority of African nations—led by the Pan-Africanist government of Libya—rejected AFRICOM , forcing the new command to instead work out of Europe .
But with the U.S. and NATO attack on Libya that led to the destruction of that country and the murder of its leader Muammar Gaddafi in 2011 , corrupt African leaders began to allow AFRICOM forces @ @ @ @ @ @ @ military-to-military relations with the United States .
Today , those efforts have resulted in 46 various forms of U.S. bases as well as military-to-military relations between 53 out of the 54 African countries and the United States .
U.S. Special Forces troops now operate in more than a dozen African nations.
” LINK MORE ON THE TOPIC : • ISIS Says Al-Qaeda Started A War With It In West Africa

Support SouthFront
The United States is considering sending a brigade of troops to Tunisia ‘for training purposes’ to counter the alleged ‘Russian threat’ to regional security, US African Command (AFRICOM) announced, following a telephone conversation on 28 May between AFRICOM Commander Gen. Stephen Townsend and Tunisian Defence Minister Imed Hazgui.
“As Russia continues to fan the flames of the Libyan conflict, regional security in North Africa is a heightened concern. We’re looking at new ways to address mutual security concerns with Tunisia, including the use of our Security Force Assistance Brigade,” Townsend said, his comments appearing in an AFRICOM press statement late Friday. “Tunisia is a prime example of how US support to our African partners aids long-term self-sufficiency, security and development. Our relationship with Tunisia is centered on enhancing our partnership to achieve mutual security goals,” the general added.
Moscow has repeatedly denied accusations of involvement in the Libyan civil war, stressing that it wants to see a diplomatic settlement in the war-torn country, and recalling that it was a NATO military intervention in the country in 2011 which turned Libya into a failed state. LINK
Behind the US’ accusations there are clearly other motivations for expanding their military presence throughout Africa. While it is quite likely that the US political, economic and military leadership is concerned by a possible Russian presence in some African countries, it has become increasingly apparent over the last decade that other ambitions and concerns have been driving the push to establish AFRICOM (which occurred on 1 October 2008) and its subsequent expansion.
As far back as 28 May 2011 Global Research reposted an analysis first posted at Southern Times on the US’ efforts to secure access to strategic resources (the original link is no longer operative).
The report reviews a study by Dr Stephen Burgess, a Zimbabwean-born associate professor at the US Air War College, which argues that Washington may have to enlist the services of the Department of Defence, the National Security Agency and the Africa Command (AFRICOM) to secure Southern Africa’s resources.
“His study, titled ‘Sustainability of Strategic Minerals in Southern Africa and Potential Conflicts and Partnerships’, says the US should move quickly to secure Southern Africa’s uranium, manganese, platinum, chrome, cobalt and rare earth minerals for America’s industrial needs and for its military as well as maintenance of weapons systems. The study focuses on resource accessibility in the DRC, Namibia, South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe and draws parallels with the 1880s scramble for Africa. To triumph in this new scramble, Burgess notes, ‘all instruments of (US) power’ must be deployed. Burgess visited all these countries – except Zimbabwe – and makes recommendations on how the US can muscle out China.
He interviewed mining sector experts, government officials and journalists as part of his research. There were also consultations with American institutions such as the Defence National Stock Pile Centre, the Defence Logistics Agency and the Marine Corps Command. A note in the study indicates that it has nothing to do with the US Air War College, raising the possibility that Burgess was working as a consultant for Washington. ‘Southern Africa contains strategic minerals, which the USA and its allies require for industrial purposes and that militaries need for production and sustainment of weapons systems. ‘The principal sustainability challenge in SADC for the USA and its allies is uncertain access to strategic minerals. ‘The cause of this challenge is increasing global demand and supply shortages caused by inadequate infrastructure, politicization of the mining industry and China’s aggressive and sometimes monopolistic behaviour in pursuit of minerals. ‘The challenge is most acute in two Southern African countries – South Africa and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) – and also growing in Zambia, Zimbabwe and Namibia. ‘Of particular concern is possible future conflict between the United States, which needs strategic minerals for national defence and other purposes, and China, which needs an increasing amount of resources to fuel its accelerating industrialization. ‘There is a rising scramble for and struggle over resources in Africa, especially in petroleum and mining economies. ‘In particular, the US government is concerned about access to ‘defence critical resources’. This requires increased levels of engagement with the African countries concerned, using all the instruments of American power and working with American and Western mining companies, as well as engagement with China and Chinese companies…” LINK
The Black Alliance for Peace has made the abolition of AFRICOM one of its central demands for many years. The Alliance states of AFRICOM:
“October 1, 2018 marked 10 years since the United States African Command (AFRICOM) had been established. The purpose of AFRICOM is to use U.S. military power to impose U.S. control of African land, resources and labor to service the needs of U.S. multi-national corporations and the wealthy in the United States. When AFRICOM was established in the months before Barack Obama assumed office as the first Black President of the United States, a majority of African nations—led by the Pan-Africanist government of Libya—rejected AFRICOM, forcing the new command to instead work out of Europe. But with the U.S. and NATO attack on Libya that led to the destruction of that country and the murder of its leader Muammar Gaddafi in 2011, corrupt African leaders began to allow AFRICOM forces to operate in their countries and establish military-to-military relations with the United States. Today, those efforts have resulted in 46 various forms of U.S. bases as well as military-to-military relations between 53 out of the 54 African countries and the United States. U.S. Special Forces troops now operate in more than a dozen African nations.” LINK
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
Support SouthFront


southfront--2020-06-01--Conflict In Afghanistan. Structured Analysis, Forecast And Settlement Scenarios

The conflict in Afghanistan spans over decades of history .
The region itself is the scene of geopolitical confrontation for at least several centuries .
In the last 50 years , there were four main stages of the international conflict in Afghanistan : • The Afghan conflict 1979-1989 – a military conflict on the territory of Afghanistan between government forces ( supported by a limited contingent of Soviet troops ) and armed groups of Afghan mujahideen , that were receiving political , financial , material and military support from the leading NATO member states , China and the conservative Islamic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1989 – 2001 .
This is an ongoing conflict of intra-Afghan forces supported by foreign powers .
This period can be divided into three parts .
• The Afghanistan War 2001-2014 .
This is a military conflict between the US-led military coalition ( International Security Assistance Force ; ISAF ) and the Taliban movement , which previously controlled most of Afghanistan .
The Northern Alliance and then the US-controlled Kabul government supported actions of the ISAF .
In fact , the US intervention in Afghanistan with the occupation of a large part of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ under the pretext of “ the fight against terrorism ” .
• The Afghanistan War 2015 – present time .
This is an armed conflict between the Kabul government , the United States and NATO forces on the one side , and the Taliban and militants from various radical groups on the other side .
It entered into an acute phase immediately after the withdrawal of the main contingent of NATO troops from Afghanistan .
Click to see the full-size image • The Kabul-based government .
It is led by President Ashraf Ghani @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pashtun population living in big cities , a part of the forces of the former Northern Alliance , ( for example forces and political influence of an ethnic Uzbek , General Abdul Rashid Do ‘ stum ) and ethnic and religious minorities .
However , the corner stone of the Kabul influence is the support that it receives from the United States and other Western countries .
Kabul represents the conditionally “ liberal ” part of the Afghan society and has no real support and popularity among the general population .
• Hezb-e-Islami @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leader of mujahideens , Gulbuddin Hekmatyar .
The party ’ s strategy is the Islamic revolution .
The ideology is close to that of the Muslim Brotherhood .
The party relies on the support of part of the rural Pashtun population and has close ties with Pakistan .
Currently , it is not carrying out open hostilities against the central government .
The population of Kabul has an extremely negatively position towards the party .
• The Taliban movement .
As of May 2020 , it seems to have the greatest support among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support rests in large shares of the Pashtun population .
It has a branched structure and a very strong military organization .
It is actively fighting against foreign invaders and the Kabul government .
• The Haqqani network .
This group is based at the border with Pakistan and is involved in an active armed struggle .
It has contacts and coordinates its efforts with the Taliban and even foreign terrorist groups like Jaish-e-Mohammed , Lashkar-e-Taiba , the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan .
Additionally , the Haqqani network allegedly has organizational and ideological @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Khorasan Province .
ISIS cells in Afghanistan have been increasing their activity .
Their popularity among the poorest part of the population is growing .
• Al-Qaeda .
Groups linked with al-Qaeda are a separate factor of instability .
In the last year , they have established close ties radicals in Syria ’ s Idlib and Turkic radical organizations in the Central Asian region .
• Local field commanders of the “ North ” .
First of all , these are Tajik and Turkmen field commanders .
Most of them support one or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ethnic communities and local armed groups .
External forces pursuing an active policy in the region : • The United States and NATO member states provide a coordinated policy led by Washington .
In the current conditions , it makes sense to view separately the activity of the United Kingdom , which largely pursues the policy of the US democratic establishment .
• The People ’ s Republic of China traditionally follows two vectors : economic and political .
In the field of security and the fight against terrorism , the position of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Collective Security Treaty Organization member states .
• The Russian Federation and Kazakhstan , and even more broadly the CSTO , seek to ensure stability of the region , promoting the concept of the Eurasian unity .
• Pakistan traditional supports the main Pashtun population of Afghanistan and has a supportive attitude towards the Taliban .
Some Pakistani elites support the expansion of ISIS in Afghanistan .
An example is the support provided to the Haqqani network .
• Saudi Arabia supports forces ideologically close to al-Qaeda as a tool of its influence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supports forces ideologically close to ISIS .
It is an opponent of Saudi Arabia ’ s influence .
• Turkey support the Turkic population of Afghanistan , pro-Turkish groups and promotes the neo-Ottoman agenda in the region .
• International terrorist organizations as independent actors in the region .
• January 27 – The United States achieved a progress in peace negotiations with the Taliban .
These were confirmed by the both sides : U.S. Special Representative for Afghanistan Reconciliation Zalmay Khalilzad and Zabiullah Mujahid , a spokesman for the Taliban .
• @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sharobak base killing at least 25 persons .
The Taliban claims that about 400 US and Afghan troops were killed .
• August 24 – The Taliban and the United States reached an agreement on the schedule of the foreign troop withdrawal from Afghanistan .
• October 25 – At least 100 Taliban fighters were killed in a special operation in the province of Baghlan .
Government forces retook Dahana i Ghuri District , which was in the hands of the Taliban for almost 3 years .
• February 29 – The Taliban @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deal in the Qatari capital , Doha .
Under the agreement , the United States and NATO will fully withdraw their forces from Afghanistan in 14 months after signing the agreement .
The Taliban , on its side , must stop attacks on the territory of Afghanistan .
• March 2 – The Taliban announced the resumption of operations against the Kabul government .
3 people died and 11 others were injured in an explosion in the east of the country .
• March 11 – The United Kingdom decided to withdraw 330 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ May 12 – 24 people were killed and 16 others were injured in an attack of gunmen on a hospital in Kabul .
An explosion erupted during the funeral of a police head killing 32 people and injuring 103 others .
President Ashraf Ghani ordered to resume operations against the Taliban in response to regular attacks .
In order to demonstrate possible effective directions for resolving the conflict in Afghanistan , it is advisable to divide the main actors into groups with a similar nature of interests .
There are four such groups @ @ @ @ @ @ @ member states .
This group of actors is not interested in stabilizing Afghanistan as an independent state .
They do not have economic interests in Afghanistan , in general , and there is no positive motivation for their activities in the region .
They see Afghanistan as a point of instability and a bridgehead of destructive impact on Russia and China .
• The diametrically opposed motives are guided by China , Russia and the countries adjacent to Afghanistan ( primarily the CSTO countries and Iran ) .
For this group of actors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a key factor of national security .
Even Pakistan , whose elites are not homogeneous , generally supports the positivist agenda for Afghanistan .
These states also have economic interests in Afghanistan .
A separate problem is the fight against drug trafficking .
Consequently , this group of actors seek to improve the socio-economic situation in Afghanistan .
• The third group of actors includes traditional Islamic extra-regional states , pursuing their own , often narrow interests and those regimes that consider Afghanistan as a springboard for implementation or an element of their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Qatar , the UAE , Turkey .
• International terrorist organizations centered around two constructs : ISIS and Al-Qaeda .
These forces consider Afghanistan as a base and a springboard for extending their activities to the Central Asia and the Middle East region , and then Russia , China , India , etc .
The interests of the various groups operating in Afghanistan , the current situation and the history of the conflict demonstrate that it is difficult , but not impossible , to stabilize the political situation in the region .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ scenarios A ) or B ) , or various configurations between A ) and B ) : A ) through the process of integrated following through on aspirations and interests : 1. the bulk of the population ; B ) in the event of a significant transformation of ideology , military , economic , political potential : 1. the bulk of the population ; For example , stabilization of the political situation in Afghanistan is possible under the following actions and conditions : • The legalization of the political wing of the Taliban @ @ @ @ @ @ @ number of Taliban functionaries in the general Afghan authorities , primarily in the justice system and the government ; • Softening the position of the Taliban towards national and religious minorities of Afghanistan ; • Inclusion in the hierarchy of power and legitimization of the regional leaders of the Taliban through the recognition of the rights of the heads of provinces and regions in those areas that are already under the control of the movement ; • The withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan .
This could happen , for example , due @ @ @ @ @ @ @ potential and/or a change in the geopolitical balance of power .
• Creation and implementation of a program of foreign economic assistance to Afghanistan with an emphasis on a direct financing of infrastructure projects through the creation of a special international fund .
The actual volume of the program should be in an amount of no less than $ 25 billion .
The term would be 5 years .
The signatories of the fund should include China , the United States , Russia , Iran , Turkey , Kazakhstan , Pakistan , Germany @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also participate , under the conditions of an altered geopolitical situation and if the US foregoes its strategy of spreading “ controlled chaos ” in the region .
• Granting autonomy rights to the regions of compact residence of national and religious minorities ( in one way or another ) .
The main factor would be their right to form the local judicial system and security forces , or to appoint their own leadership .
• Connecting the expanded security forces of Afghanistan to the procedures for ensuring security and the fight against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the CSTO and SCO .
MORE ON THE TOPIC : • Caliphate In Miniature : Rift Between Turkey And Al-Qaeda In Idlib

Support SouthFront
DEAR FRIENDS. IF YOU LIKE THIS TYPE OF ANALYTICAL CONTENT, SUPPORT OUR WORK: PayPal: southfront@internet.ru Donation alerts: https://donationalerts.com/r/southfront Gumroad: https://gumroad.com/southfront Or via: http://southfront.org/donate/ or via: https://www.patreon.com/southfront, BTC: 3Gbs4rjcVUtQd8p3CiFUCxPLZwRqurezRZ, BCH ABC: qpf2cphc5dkuclkqur7lhj2yuqq9pk3hmukle77vhq, ETH: 0x9f4cda013e354b8fc285bf4b9a60460cee7f7ea9
Section 1
The conflict in Afghanistan spans over decades of history. The region itself is the scene of geopolitical confrontation for at least several centuries.
In the last 50 years, there were four main stages of the international conflict in Afghanistan:
The Afghan conflict 1979-1989 – a military conflict on the territory of Afghanistan between government forces (supported by a limited contingent of Soviet troops) and armed groups of Afghan mujahideen, that were receiving political, financial, material and military support from the leading NATO member states, China and the conservative Islamic world. The Civil War of 1989 – 2001. This is an ongoing conflict of intra-Afghan forces supported by foreign powers. This period can be divided into three parts. The Afghanistan War 2001-2014. This is a military conflict between the US-led military coalition (International Security Assistance Force; ISAF) and the Taliban movement, which previously controlled most of Afghanistan. The Northern Alliance and then the US-controlled Kabul government supported actions of the ISAF. In fact, the US intervention in Afghanistan with the occupation of a large part of the country’s territory took place under the pretext of “the fight against terrorism”. The Afghanistan War 2015 – present time. This is an armed conflict between the Kabul government, the United States and NATO forces on the one side, and the Taliban and militants from various radical groups on the other side. It entered into an acute phase immediately after the withdrawal of the main contingent of NATO troops from Afghanistan.
Click to see the full-size image
Section 2
Intra-Afghan factions:
The Kabul-based government. It is led by President Ashraf Ghani and relies on a part of the Pashtun population living in big cities, a part of the forces of the former Northern Alliance, (for example forces and political influence of an ethnic Uzbek, General Abdul Rashid Do‘stum) and ethnic and religious minorities. However, the corner stone of the Kabul influence is the support that it receives from the United States and other Western countries. Kabul represents the conditionally “liberal” part of the Afghan society and has no real support and popularity among the general population. Hezb-e-Islami Gulbuddin. Its head is the former leader of mujahideens, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. The party’s strategy is the Islamic revolution. The ideology is close to that of the Muslim Brotherhood. The party relies on the support of part of the rural Pashtun population and has close ties with Pakistan. Currently, it is not carrying out open hostilities against the central government. The population of Kabul has an extremely negatively position towards the party. The Taliban movement. As of May 2020, it seems to have the greatest support among the population of the country. Its support rests in large shares of the Pashtun population. It has a branched structure and a very strong military organization. It is actively fighting against foreign invaders and the Kabul government. The Haqqani network. This group is based at the border with Pakistan and is involved in an active armed struggle. It has contacts and coordinates its efforts with the Taliban and even foreign terrorist groups like Jaish-e-Mohammed, Lashkar-e-Taiba, the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan. Additionally, the Haqqani network allegedly has organizational and ideological links with ISIS> ISIS – Khorasan Province. ISIS cells in Afghanistan have been increasing their activity. Their popularity among the poorest part of the population is growing. Al-Qaeda. Groups linked with al-Qaeda are a separate factor of instability. In the last year, they have established close ties radicals in Syria’s Idlib and Turkic radical organizations in the Central Asian region. Local field commanders of the “North”. First of all, these are Tajik and Turkmen field commanders. Most of them support one or another radical organization. They rely on ethnic communities and local armed groups.
Section 3
External forces pursuing an active policy in the region:
The United States and NATO member states provide a coordinated policy led by Washington. In the current conditions, it makes sense to view separately the activity of the United Kingdom, which largely pursues the policy of the US democratic establishment. The People’s Republic of China traditionally follows two vectors: economic and political. In the field of security and the fight against terrorism, the position of China coincides with the interests of the Collective Security Treaty Organization member states. The Russian Federation and Kazakhstan, and even more broadly the CSTO, seek to ensure stability of the region, promoting the concept of the Eurasian unity. Pakistan traditional supports the main Pashtun population of Afghanistan and has a supportive attitude towards the Taliban. Some Pakistani elites support the expansion of ISIS in Afghanistan. An example is the support provided to the Haqqani network. Saudi Arabia supports forces ideologically close to al-Qaeda as a tool of its influence in the Islamic world. Qatar supports forces ideologically close to ISIS. It is an opponent of Saudi Arabia’s influence. Turkey support the Turkic population of Afghanistan, pro-Turkish groups and promotes the neo-Ottoman agenda in the region. International terrorist organizations as independent actors in the region.
Section 4
Key developments of 2019:
January 27 – The United States achieved a progress in peace negotiations with the Taliban. These were confirmed by the both sides: U.S. Special Representative for Afghanistan Reconciliation Zalmay Khalilzad and Zabiullah Mujahid, a spokesman for the Taliban.
March 2 – The Taliban stormed the Sharobak base killing at least 25 persons. The Taliban claims that about 400 US and Afghan troops were killed.
March 30 – The Taliban seized a district in northeastern Afghanistan. 14 people died.
August 24 – The Taliban and the United States reached an agreement on the schedule of the foreign troop withdrawal from Afghanistan.
October 25 – At least 100 Taliban fighters were killed in a special operation in the province of Baghlan. Government forces retook Dahana i Ghuri District, which was in the hands of the Taliban for almost 3 years.
Key developments of 2020:
February 29 – The Taliban and the United States signed a peace deal in the Qatari capital, Doha. Under the agreement, the United States and NATO will fully withdraw their forces from Afghanistan in 14 months after signing the agreement. The Taliban, on its side, must stop attacks on the territory of Afghanistan.
March 2 – The Taliban announced the resumption of operations against the Kabul government. 3 people died and 11 others were injured in an explosion in the east of the country.
March 11 – The United Kingdom decided to withdraw 330 personnel from Afghanistan by mid-July.
May 12 – 24 people were killed and 16 others were injured in an attack of gunmen on a hospital in Kabul. An explosion erupted during the funeral of a police head killing 32 people and injuring 103 others. President Ashraf Ghani ordered to resume operations against the Taliban in response to regular attacks.
Section 5
In order to demonstrate possible effective directions for resolving the conflict in Afghanistan, it is advisable to divide the main actors into groups with a similar nature of interests.
There are four such groups:
The United States and NATO member states. This group of actors is not interested in stabilizing Afghanistan as an independent state. They do not have economic interests in Afghanistan, in general, and there is no positive motivation for their activities in the region. They see Afghanistan as a point of instability and a bridgehead of destructive impact on Russia and China. The diametrically opposed motives are guided by China, Russia and the countries adjacent to Afghanistan (primarily the CSTO countries and Iran). For this group of actors, the stability of the region is a key factor of national security. Even Pakistan, whose elites are not homogeneous, generally supports the positivist agenda for Afghanistan. These states also have economic interests in Afghanistan. A separate problem is the fight against drug trafficking. Consequently, this group of actors seek to improve the socio-economic situation in Afghanistan. The third group of actors includes traditional Islamic extra-regional states, pursuing their own, often narrow interests and those regimes that consider Afghanistan as a springboard for implementation or an element of their geopolitical constructs. These are Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE, Turkey. International terrorist organizations centered around two constructs: ISIS and Al-Qaeda. These forces consider Afghanistan as a base and a springboard for extending their activities to the Central Asia and the Middle East region, and then Russia, China, India, etc.
Section 6
The interests of the various groups operating in Afghanistan, the current situation and the history of the conflict demonstrate that it is difficult, but not impossible, to stabilize the political situation in the region.
Peaceful settlement can be achieved by implementing scenarios A) or B), or various configurations between A) and B):
A) through the process of integrated following through on aspirations and interests:
1. the bulk of the population;
2. The key domestic political forces;
3. The key external actors.
B) in the event of a significant transformation of ideology, military, economic, political potential:
1. the bulk of the population;
2. key domestic political forces;
3. The key external actors.
For example, stabilization of the political situation in Afghanistan is possible under the following actions and conditions:
The legalization of the political wing of the Taliban;
The involvement of a significant number of Taliban functionaries in the general Afghan authorities, primarily in the justice system and the government;
Softening the position of the Taliban towards national and religious minorities of Afghanistan;
Inclusion in the hierarchy of power and legitimization of the regional leaders of the Taliban through the recognition of the rights of the heads of provinces and regions in those areas that are already under the control of the movement;
The withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan. This could happen, for example, due to a decrease of the US economic potential and/or a change in the geopolitical balance of power.
Creation and implementation of a program of foreign economic assistance to Afghanistan with an emphasis on a direct financing of infrastructure projects through the creation of a special international fund. The actual volume of the program should be in an amount of no less than $25 billion. The term would be 5 years. The signatories of the fund should include China, the United States, Russia, Iran, Turkey, Kazakhstan, Pakistan, Germany, France. Other Western States could also participate, under the conditions of an altered geopolitical situation and if the US foregoes its strategy of spreading “controlled chaos” in the region.
Granting autonomy rights to the regions of compact residence of national and religious minorities (in one way or another). The main factor would be their right to form the local judicial system and security forces, or to appoint their own leadership.
Connecting the expanded security forces of Afghanistan to the procedures for ensuring security and the fight against terrorism and extremism in the appropriate formats of the CSTO and SCO.
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
Support SouthFront


southfront--2020-06-01--Syrian Air Force Received Batch Of MiG-29 Jets From Russia

Russia has intensified its military involvement in the Syrian conflict .
On May 30 , Syrian state media announced that it had received a batch of MiG-29 multirole fighters from Russia .
Damascus did not provide details regarding the number of the received jets , but said that they are entering service with the Syrian Air Force on June 1 .
They are set to conduct regular patrols in Syrian airspace .
Prior to the delivery , the Syrian Air Force had at least 20 MiG-29 jets .
Moscow is also working to expand its military infrastructure .
On May @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a directive tasking the Defense Ministry , in cooperation with the Foreign Ministry , with holding negotiations with Syria on transferring more real estate and water territory to the Russian military ’ s possession .
Russia currently has two permanent military bases in the war-torn country — the Hmeimim air base in Latakia province and a naval facility at the port of Tartus on the Mediterranean Sea .
The intensification of Russian support to the Damascus government comes as Turkey continues its military buildup in northwestern Syria .
On May 30 , May @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Army deployed additional troops and equipment , including at least four M110 self-propelled howitzers , in Greater Idlib .
The configuration of Turkish military positions and Ankara ’ s attitude towards Damascus demonstrate that Turkey is not going to use these force against Idlib terrorists .
Rather , these reinforcements are needed to secure their safety in the event of any advance by the Syrian Army .
On May 30 , pro-government sources even claimed that Turkish artillery carried out several strikes on positions of the Syrian Army near Urem al-Kubra .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Syrians created additional fortifications at their positions in Saraqib and Ma ` arat al-Nu ` man as well as the Zawiya Mountain .
Pro-militant sources also claim that the army from time to time conducts limited precision strikes on militant positions along the contact line in southern Idlib .
On top of this , late on May 31 , an unidentified unmanned combat aerial vehicle delivered a series of airstrikes on militants ’ positions on the al-Zawiya Mountian .
At least 3 militants were reportedly killed .
The material damage remains unclear .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Syrian Army vehicle with an IED and then shelled it near al-Sukhna .
3 soldiers were allegedly killed .
The anti-ISIS raid that came in response to the attack led to no results .
On the next day , reports appeared that an officer and a soldier were killed in two separate ISIS attacks in the provinces of Homs and Deir Ezzor .
Over the past weeks , government forces have contributed notable efforts to hunt down ISIS cells hiding in the Homs-Deir Ezzor desert .
Despite this , the terrorist threat @ @ @ @ @ @ @

Support SouthFront
To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
Russia has intensified its military involvement in the Syrian conflict.
On May 30, Syrian state media announced that it had received a batch of MiG-29 multirole fighters from Russia. Damascus did not provide details regarding the number of the received jets, but said that they are entering service with the Syrian Air Force on June 1. They are set to conduct regular patrols in Syrian airspace. Prior to the delivery, the Syrian Air Force had at least 20 MiG-29 jets.
Moscow is also working to expand its military infrastructure. On May 29, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a directive tasking the Defense Ministry, in cooperation with the Foreign Ministry, with holding negotiations with Syria on transferring more real estate and water territory to the Russian military’s possession. Russia currently has two permanent military bases in the war-torn country — the Hmeimim air base in Latakia province and a naval facility at the port of Tartus on the Mediterranean Sea.
The intensification of Russian support to the Damascus government comes as Turkey continues its military buildup in northwestern Syria. On May 30, May 31 and June 1, the Turkish Army deployed additional troops and equipment, including at least four M110 self-propelled howitzers, in Greater Idlib.
The configuration of Turkish military positions and Ankara’s attitude towards Damascus demonstrate that Turkey is not going to use these force against Idlib terrorists.
Rather, these reinforcements are needed to secure their safety in the event of any advance by the Syrian Army. On May 30, pro-government sources even claimed that Turkish artillery carried out several strikes on positions of the Syrian Army near Urem al-Kubra.
In response to the Turkish posture, the Syrians created additional fortifications at their positions in Saraqib and Ma`arat al-Nu`man as well as the Zawiya Mountain. Pro-militant sources also claim that the army from time to time conducts limited precision strikes on militant positions along the contact line in southern Idlib.
On top of this, late on May 31, an unidentified unmanned combat aerial vehicle delivered a series of airstrikes on militants’ positions on the al-Zawiya Mountian. At least 3 militants were reportedly killed. The material damage remains unclear.
On May 30, ISIS cells targeted a Syrian Army vehicle with an IED and then shelled it near al-Sukhna. 3 soldiers were allegedly killed. The anti-ISIS raid that came in response to the attack led to no results. On the next day, reports appeared that an officer and a soldier were killed in two separate ISIS attacks in the provinces of Homs and Deir Ezzor. Over the past weeks, government forces have contributed notable efforts to hunt down ISIS cells hiding in the Homs-Deir Ezzor desert. Despite this, the terrorist threat still remains high in the area.
Support SouthFront


southfront--2020-06-01--MICA Short-To-Medium Range Air-To-Air And Surface-To-Air Missile (Infographics)

Click to see the full-size image The MICA is an anti-air multi-target , all weather , fire-and-forget short and medium-range @ @ @ @ @ MBDA .
MORE ON THE TOPIC : • Russia Launches Its First Aframax Tanker “ @ @ @ @ @ Shipyard

Support SouthFront
The MICA is an anti-air multi-target, all weather, fire-and-forget short and medium-range missile system developed by the MBDA.
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
Support SouthFront


southfront--2020-06-01--Military Situation In Area Of Libya’s Tripoli On June 1, 2020 (Map Update)

Enemy continues to re-inforce with multiple C-130E cargo/transports 2-3 flights daily into Misrata , building up men , munitions , artillery and armour .
In Tripoli sector LNA has pulled back from Artillery Camp to defensive positions north of Wadi Rabi ’ a Rd .
LNA forces are firm at Tripoli Intl Airport but lost control of the overpass ( “ bridge “ ) and the Airport Road north .
Enemy has been halted south and west of the airport ( Sidra/Tuweisha Road ) Enemy has not yet developed the Operational offensive for Tarhuna .
The marked extract of SF @ @ @ @ @ @ @ natural defensive terrain protecting Tarhuna from the north and west .
So far all enemy attacks or probes from Qarabuli , Msallatah , or Gharyan have been easily defeated .
A new force has assembled in Misrata using landed Syrian mercenaries and Turkish armored vehicles and travelled via Zliten-Khoms-Msallatah , exact strength/composition unknown .
Meantime LAAF has struck multiple targets in Gharyan stopping the enemy advancing east .
No known progress on the ground of LNA across the Wadi Zemzem to Bu Qrayn , but conficting reports of tit-for-tat air strikes in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ //uploads.disquscdn.com/images/6a50304c9606fb93ac60f09e988ccb1fd111e6b3c9b9bdde625603037d100ef0.jpg

Support SouthFront
A brief overview of the recent developments in Libya:
The Libyan National Army (LNA) captured Asabeah from the Government of National Accord (GNA);
The LNA repelled several attacks by GNA forces and Turkish-backed militants in Tripoli Airport;
Clashes continue in the southern Tripoli.
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
Support SouthFront