Delusion talk from a conservative MP to act in a direct confrontation with Russian warplanes above Syria. Calling upon NATO to engage the Russians due the daily attacks on rebel areas of Aleppo. Lavrov has called on the US to separate the moderate rebels from Al Nusra, the Al Qaeda affiliate which is considered a terrorist group. After failing to do so, the Pentagon has intervened and the hawks won the debate in the National Securicty Council with approval of President Obama.
Andrew Mitchell, advised by former British military officials and supported by the former CIA director David Petraeus, has been arguing for a no-fly zone for many months. In recent weeks some of Mitchell’s advisers have developed this proposal into a call to track Russian jets from UK warships off the coast of Syria, and for a complete no-fly zone for Syrian helicopters over civilian areas. It has been argued that Syrian helicopters are doing all the damage with chemical, napalm and high explosive barrel bombs. One proposal has been to bomb air runways.
Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Mitchell said: “What we are saying is very clear. No one wants to see a firefight with Russia, no one wants to shoot down a Russian plane.
“But what we do say is that the international community has an avowed responsibility to protect [R2P argument used in Kosovo and Libya? – Oui] and that protection must be exerted. If that means confronting Russian air power defensively, on behalf of the innocent people on the ground who we are trying to protect, then we should do that.”
Mitchell added that “you would certainly use Nato aircraft” to enforce the no-fly zone. “It’s not a declaration of war against Russia but it is an absolute declaration that we will seek to protect the innocent victims of these war crimes.”
Vladimir Putin’s support for the Syrian leader, Bashar al-Assad, has led to mounting tension between the west and Moscow. In the latest deterioration, the Kremlin on Tuesday said Putin will not visit Paris next week after declining to meet François Hollande solely for talks on Syria.
French President Francois Hollande has not yet decided whether to meet Russian leader Vladimir Putin in Paris next week, after the Kremlin blocked a UN bid to end the bombing of Aleppo, Paris said. [Impose a no-fly zone in support of Al Nusra rebels on the ground in eastern Aleppo – Oui]
Putin is due in Paris on October 19 to inaugurate a new Orthodox church near the Eiffel Tower in a visit that is fast turning into a diplomatic headache for France. Hollande left open the question of whether he would receive Putin, describing the scorched-earth campaign in the Syrian city of Aleppo as a war crime.
“I asked myself the question… Is it useful? Is it necessary? Can it be a way of exerting pressure? Can we get him to stop what he is doing with the Syrian regime?” Hollande told the TMC channel.
The Kremlin however said preparations for Putin’s visit were continuing.
“There are plans for talks with the Elysee Palace (seat of the French presidency) and Putin will take part in the inauguration of the Russian spiritual centre,” his spokesman Dmitry Peskov said. Paris had not informed Moscow of any changes to their plans, he added.
Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault told France Inter radio on Monday that Hollande would decide whether to meet with Putin “in light of the situation in Aleppo and Syria”. If Hollande agrees to meet Putin, “it will not be for pleasantries, it will be to speak the truth,” he said, calling the Syrian and Russian bombardments of Aleppo a “gift to terrorists”.
- ○ Hollande: “Putin not welcome for talks in Paris”
○ Putin won’t go to Paris on October 19 — Kremlin source
The Syrian people are suffering under the `moderate rebels’ and `opposition forces’ backed by the US, NATO member states and their allies in the Gulf states and Israel. Yet their suffering is largely ignored in the mainstream media unless it furthers the agenda dictated by the State Department.
Aleppo has become synonymous with destruction and “Syrian state-generated” violence among those whose perception of the situation in the war-torn nation is contained within the prism of mainstream media narratives.
The NATO-aligned media maintains a tight grip on information coming out of this beleaguered city, ensuring that whatever comes out is tailored to meet State Department requirements and advocacy for regime change. The propaganda mill churns out familiar tales of chemical weapons, siege, starvation and bombs targeting civilians-all of which are attributed to the Syrian government and military, with little variation on this theme.
The purpose of this photo essay and my journey to Aleppo on Aug. 14 was to discover for myself as a Western journalist the truth behind the major storylines in the U.S. and NATO narrative on Syria.
East and West Aleppo
Most Western media fail to highlight the “tale of two cities” playing out between eastern and western Aleppo. The east is occupied by a number of groups backed by the United States, NATO and their allies in the Gulf, like Saudi Arabia, and Israel. Civilians in the government-held area of western Aleppo describe these groups broadly as “terrorists,” often without noting any specific group.
Over 1.5 million civilians live in the government-held areas of western Aleppo, including 600,000 civilians who fled eastern Aleppo in 2012. Of the 200,000 to 220,000 people living in the terrorist-occupied areas in the eastern parts of the city, an estimated 50,000 or more are members of the so-called “rebel” factions and their families, according to the Aleppo Medical Association.
In most Western media reports, little mention is made of this division of Aleppo which was created by the incursion of factions of armed insurgents (or, as the mainstream media and U.S. government call them, “moderate rebels”) which drove hordes of civilians out of the eastern parts of the city into the safety of the Syrian government-held western area.
For anyone interested in a series of Dutch documentaries filmed in Syria of today compared with Syria of 2008.
○ VARA programs missed: Floortje Returns to Syria
Syria Comment by Prof. Landis, I came across this article with comments about daily life in Damascus (2013) …
○ How life in Assad controlled Syria has remained somewhat “normal”… students going to university, cafe life, traffic jams, etc.
Related diaries on Russia / Syria confrontation …
Today I came across this article:
Declassified CIA Documents on Truman and Terror in Palestine from Zionist Gangs. Published on the eve of the UN vote to partition Palestine – November 28, 1947.
Image of the summary CIA report.
The US, by supporting partition, has already lost much of its prestige in the Near East. In the event partition is imposed on Palestine, the resulting conflict will seriously disturb the social, economic, and political stability of the Arab world, and US commercial and strategic interests will be dangerously jeopardized. While irresponsible tribesmen and fanatic Moslems are haphazardly blowing up parts of the oil pipelines and attacking occasional Americans, it is possible that the responsible governments will refuse to sign pipeline conventions, oil concessions, civil air agreements, and trade pacts. The various projects which are necessary to raise the standard of living cannot be carried through without US assistance and guidance. With the US committed to partition, such developments will be shelved indefinitely. The poverty, unrest, and hopelessness upon which Communist propaganda thrives will increase throughout the Arab world, and Soviet agents (some of whom have already been smuggled into Palestine as Jewish DP’s) [Displaced Persons (DP) – Oui] will scatter into the other Arab states and there attempt to organize so-called “democratic movements” such as the one existing in Greece.
If the UN recommends partition, it will be morally bound to take steps to enforce partition, with the major powers acting as the instruments of force. The dangerous potentialities of such a development to US-Arab and US-USSR relations need no emphasis.
○ Ben Gurion Foresaw Palestinian Expulsion in 1937 | Tikun Olam |
○ Cold War, Nuclear Arms Reduction, and Détente
○ U.S. Conduct in the Middle East Since World War Il and the Folly Of Intervention | CATO Institute |