Sic Semper Tyrannis

RUSSIAN FEDERATION SITREP 11 FEBRUARY 2021 by Patrick Armstrong

WAR PLANS. US/NATO war plans always start with a heavy bombardment. The expectation is that complete air superiority will be quickly gained so that aircraft and cruise missiles will have unrestricted freedom to destroy vital infrastructure. This succeeds against countries like Iraq, to say nothing of Afghanistan. But it won't happen if the first few minutes of the war see the destruction of half of NATO's airfields, hangars, ports and EW assets in a cloud of hypersonic missiles. Russia sends another message to Washington and Brussels – don't even think of it. But, of course, they are thinking of it. Shoygu called for increased production of hypersonic missiles. Not, they say, easily detectable by radar. A US ship entering the Black Sea would have about three minutes to detect and defend against Kinzhals fired from 550 kms away in Crimea. The just-deployed Bastion system would take longer. Russia isn't trying to do everything everywhere, just defend its own territory: that's an achievable goal; the other isn't.

WAR DREAMS. Fantasy: in NATO planning the Polish Army quickly seizes Kaliningrad. Partial reality: in Polish Army war game, Warsaw is surrounded in five days. Real reality. Poland has targets: see above.

NAVALNIY. The story continues. The theory that he's being fitted up for a treason charge was given a boost when Zakharova said he should be called an "agent of influence" rather than a politician. His suspended sentence for fraud was lifted and he's off to prison. Read Yves Rocher's statement; sounds to me as if the company believes he did swindle them. The fact that there's now a campaign against the company suggests my deduction is correct. Meanwhile his wife is being set up as the new Navalniy – it's evident from the Charité report that his health is pretty bad. After the lacklustre performance of the demos, one of his people declared a moratorium but was ordered to reverse the decision.

COVID. The Sputnik vaccine received good press from The Lancet. Vaccination centre in Sochi. Russia has developed a quick PCR process. Forget all that stuff we were saying a few months ago: we want it now. All this is causing cognitive dissonance for Western propaganda organs: read this tripe: "Putin’s COVID-19 charm offensive will be transient".

FINES. Moscow fines RFE/RL for failure to declare 'foreign agent' status on material aimed at Russians. Washington will have the fantods but this is just Moscow's version of the US FARA legislation in action.

POLICE BRUTALITY. Here's the video Moscow is giving every visitor who comes to lecture it.

START Extended for five years. A good thing, but otherwise more of the same from Washington: "determination of Russia to damage and disrupt our democracy" and so on.

RUSSIA-CHINA. A piece in the Russian media suggests that the two are very close to concluding a formal military alliance and enumerates the mutual advantages to the world's largest economy and best military (too soon to call it that? Should we wait a few years when it will be obvious?). It's coming.

EU. The EU has made a mess of its COVID vaccine policy. An EU official is sent to Moscow to beg for the Sputnik vaccine. But he can't resist giving the usual moralistic lecture. (As an aside, I am sick and tired of EU flunkeys posturing about "European values"; if it weren't for the USSR – 80% – and the Anglosphere – 20% – they'd all be goose-stepping around in leather giving each other Hitler salutes: Hitler, Franco, Mussolini and the rest of them were all Europeans). Lavrov is not amused and called the EU unreliable. EU guy returns, usual sources accuse him of being feeble, and he starts talking tough again. "Headless chicken". Moscow doesn't care: the Western model is now seen as one of failure.

WESTERN VALUES™. Listen to Blinken explain why Israel can annex Golan ; one day he will explain why Crimea can't be Russian.

DAVOS. An inflection moment? Putin speaks of the failure of the "Washington Consensus" and unilateralism. Xi agrees. Merkel promises neutrality.

PUTIN DERANGEMENT SYNDROME. Vladimir Putin Has Become America’s Ex-Boyfriend From Hell: "a geopolitical stalker". This from the outlet that has "stalked" Putin 3000 times in four years. And never forget this demented bit of filth.

UKRAINE. Hopeless. Meanwhile, let's ban the Russian vaccine. Not that we have any from anywhere else.

THE DEATH OF IRONY. If it's Russia, it's OK to ban it. Actually they're opposition TV channels.

© Patrick Armstrong Analysis, Canada Russia Observer

“Military experts believe Iranian-made drones set off from Yemen to strike Aramco" ra'i al yowm

I was provided this translation by Alastair Crooke's  "The Raw and the Cooked" on line magazine published from Crooke's location in Beirut.  This a very fine subscription service and I recommend it highly.   [email protected]  is their contact e-mail address.  pl 

--------------

“Military experts believe Iranian-made drones set off from Yemen to strike Aramco

Rai al-Youm daily, 17 Sept 2019

The military commanders in the USA are keeping silent with regards to the source of the attacks that targeted the Aramco oil facilities last Saturday and that caused some serious damages there. It seems that the Houthis have used Iranian-made modern drones and that a commando unit from Saudi land served to steer the drones at the last few minutes prior to the strikes.
“So far, the statements of the American politicians are leading the list of accusations directed at Iran for allegedly being responsible for the attacks... The American politicians are speaking about Iran’s responsibility although the Houthis have released a statement where they stressed that they stand behind this operation knowing that the Houthis have always been honest in their military statements in order to gain the trust of the international media outlets.

“The odd part consists of the silence of the American military commanders. Indeed, there has been no official report released by the Pentagon that accuses Iran. Furthermore, no senior military officers made any statements to accuse Iran. The senior officers and military experts are actually cautious and not taking the risk of making any incorrect statements. They realize that the arsenal of the American radars at the Arabian Gulf including the land and the ship-mounted radars have recorded at least half the drones’ flight, which is enough data to tell the source.

“The Abqaiq station is geographically close to Bahrain and Qatar. It is thus close to the American Fifth Fleet in Bahrain, which is equipped with modern radars. It is also close to the Al-Udeid base in Qatar, which is home to the most modern radars of the American military industry. These radars are capable of monitoring the activity of the rockets and drones coming from Iran or Iraq. If these radars failed to do that, then this constitutes a scandal for the American military industry knowing that the radars are pointed at Iran.

“The secret behind the US military commanders’ silence and them abstaining from mentioning the source of the drones is because they don’t wish to admit that the drones are Iranian-made and were able to dodge the radars that are deployed in the region. Iran might have smuggled these drones to the Houthis... Iran possesses advanced drones that are capable of flying for long distances while loaded with explosives. These include drones that can carry out suicide missions by striking fixed targets such as the Muhajir, Raad, and Karrar drones. These have succeeded in the past to fly above the American aircraft carriers. Some comments are circulating at the American military chat rooms that go: “If Iran is capable of shooting down a Global Hawk, and if it was able to take photos of the aircraft carriers in the Gulf, then this means that its drones are as advanced as its missiles. This is something that one must admit.”””

The Geo-Political Poker Game: Where’s the 'Off-Ramp'? by Alastair Crooke

 

At the beating heart of Trump’s Presidency lies the notion of the Art of the Deal.  It is said that Trump has few convictions, but his notion of how to negotiate – with a big stick, maximum leverage, and with credible, fear-inducing ‘threats’ -  is central to his whole Presidency.  It underlies his tariff and American job protection platform; his fiscal profligacy  that has to keep giving a fiscal quid pro quo to social programmes, in return for escalating ‘big stick’ defence expenditures; and – of course – it underlies his whole geo-political approach, particularly in respect upping the stakes toward China, North Korea and Iran.

This underlying notion of the ‘deal’ is transactional in essence, best practiced as a one-to-one operation, rather than in a multilateral context.  But in the sphere of geo-politics this is not so easy.  In the next months, but climaxing in May (other things being equal), Trump will put his negotiating theory to the test in a very different ambit to that of New York real estate. The North Korean summit should be held; the verdict on the nuclear agreement with Iran is due to be pronounced then; the US Israeli-Palestinian determination is scheduled to be ‘handed down’ in May; the Sunni states’ Iran containment roles to be set; and any punitive tariffs on China will be decided, and enacted.  Although apparently disconnected issues, their clustering together in May will inter-connect them: Success or failure in one, will leach into parallel spheres.

And in the background – of course – will grind on the western Intelligence Establishment’s determination to cut down President Putin and Russia (the Salisbury Skripal affair) to size - and through slapping down Putin, to wound Trump too, naturally.   

Russia has said that it will respond proportionately to the collective diplomatic expulsions.  Plainly, some in the Deep State fraternity are hoping that Russia’s response will serve as pretext for a further round of decrying President Putin, with the added possibility to push Russia out of the SWIFT clearing system.   

Such then is the confluence of issues, but what happens if someone calls the bluff?  (We can ignore South Korea caving-in on trade). What happens, more importantly, if the bluff is shown for what it is – a bluff, widely and publicly?

What happens if the Chinese, the North Koreans, the Iranians and the Russians understand the concept behind the Art of the Deal, and furthermore know that the US is not really in a position to make good on the bluff – on its full-throated threats of military or trade actions – at least?  Trump may be ready for a demonstrative missile ‘tweet’ such as the 57 Tomahawk missiles launched at Syria. But the principal global actors are unlikely to ‘quake’ at that.  Times change.  American military might is now seen in its limitations, as well as in its substantial capabilities.

Syria Report - 17 March 2018

In the ongoing battles around Damascus it seems more and more clear to me that the Syrian Government is consolidating its position in its heartlands in anticipation of an armistice negotiated by the Russians, an armistice that may last for years as the government and the rebels (now mostly jihadis) gather their strength for a renewal of the conflict toward a final result that will result in annihilation of one side.  The East Gouta pocket is being sliced up apace by the SAA.  The western part of the pocket is a built up urban area while the eastern area is farmland and villages.  The SAA chose to go into Gouta from the east and are now evacuating civilians from the remaining jihadi held urban areas in the west of the pocket.  10,000 are reported to have been evacuated thus far.  They are assisted in this by the Russian military police.  The evacuees are leaving by moving east through the farmland rather than west through metropolitan Damascus.  There have been numerous demonstrations in favor of the government in the rebel/jihadi held areas of Gouta.  This has been little reported in Western media.

The continuing US policy of regime change in Syria leaves little possibility that the government can recover Syria east and north of the Euphrates River. That land is under US government "protection."  How the movement of (US) Kurds to Afrin to fight will affect that is unpredictable.

As SST forecast just after the fall of Aleppo City to the government, Idlib Province has become a cancerous wound in the side of the possibility of a fully re-united Syria.  The Turks are taking advantage of their burgeoning relationship with Russia to eradicate Kurdish control of Afrin district in Aleppo Province.  The Turks are making steady progress in this effort.  The evolving tie to Russia is evident in the S-400 SAM deal and Russia seems complicit in the "Olive Branch" campaign.  There are clearly limits to Russian protection of the SAG.  The Turks have now established "observation posts" of company size all along the eastern border of Idlib Province.  These are positioned to impede a renewed advance of  R+6 into Idlib Province once SAA and friends are finished in the Damascus area.    The latest of these posts is now being placed just NW of Aleppo so as to prevent an advance by the government to the west into northern Aleppo Province.  IMO what we are seeing is a slow motion annexation of NW Syria by Turkey.  Tayyip Erdogan seems to want to be remembered as Fatih Sultan Tayyip.  Would the SAG be strong enough to fight Turkey in Idlib?  That is an open question.

The Russian MoD says that the US is planning cruise missile attacks on Syria in response to a putative gas attack in the Gouta area.  This is somewhat amusing  given the recent capture of a jihadi chlorine gas factory in East Gouts, but, we will see.  pl  

 https://southfront.org/syrian-army-advances-reportedly-liberates-two-more-towns-evacuates-thousands-of-civilians-in-eastern-ghouta-map-photos/

https://southfront.org/overview-of-battle-for-afrin-on-march-17-2018-map-video-photo/

https://southfront.org/turkish-army-is-establishing-new-observation-post-north-of-aleppo-city-video/

https://southfront.org/u-s-deploys-naval-strike-groups-for-attacks-on-syria-trains-militants-for-false-flag-chemical-attacks/

Will the War Clouds Pass Us By, Or Will the Storm Break? by Alastair Crooke

    

The compulsive hatred of President Putin in élite western circles has surpassed anything witnessed during the Cold War.  Western states have been hyping political hostility in almost every sphere: In Syria, in Ukraine, across the Middle East, in Eurasia, and now, this hatred has leached into the Security Council, leaving it irretrievably polarised -- and paralysed.  This hostility has percolated too, across to all Russia’s allies, contaminating them. It potends – almost inevitably – further sanctions on Russia (and its friends) under the catch-all Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act.  But the real question is: Does this collective hysteria portend war?

Ed Curtis reminds us of the almost parabolic escalation of antagonism in recent weeks: 

“This has happened as the Russia-gate claims have fallen to pieces … All across the media spectrum, from the big name corporate stenographers like The New York Times, CNN, National Public Radio, The Washington Post to The Atlantic and Nation magazines and other “leftist” publications such as Mother Jones and Who What Why, the Russia and Putin bashing has become hysterical in tone, joined as it is with an anti-Trump obsession … “Russia Sees Midterm Elections as a Chance to Sow Fresh Discord (NY Times, 2/13), “Russia Strongman [Putin] haspulled off one of the greatest acts of political sabotage in modern history” (The Atlantic, Jan. /Feb. 2018), “Mueller’s Latest Indictment Shows Trump Has Helped Putin Cover Up a Crime” (Mother Jones, 2/16/18), “A Russian Sightseeing Tour For Realists” (whowhatwhy.com, 2/7/18), etc.”

By casting Russia’s interference in the US presidential election as “an attack on American democracy” and thus “an act of war”, the ‘Covert American State’ is saying – implicitly - that just as the act of war at Pearl Harbour brought a retaliatory war upon Japan, so, pari passu, Russia’s effort to subvert America require similar retribution.

Across the Middle East – but especially in Syria – there is ample dry tinder for a conflagration, with incipient or existing conflicts between Turkey and the Kurds; between the Turkish Army and the Syrian Army; between Turkish forces and American forces in Manbij; between Syrian forces and American forces; between American forces and the USAF, and Russian servicemen and Russia’s aerospace forces; between American forces and Iranian forces, and last but not least, between Israel and Syria.

This is one heck of a pile of combustible material.  Plainly any incident amidst such compressed volatility may escalate dangerously.  But this is not the point.  The point is: Does all this Russia hysteria imply that the US is contemplating a war of choice against Russia, or in support of a re-set of the Middle East landscape to Israel’s and Saudi Arabia’s benefit?  Will the US deliberately provoke Russia – by killing Russian servicemen, for example – in order to find pretext for a ‘bloody nose’ military action launched against Russia itself – for responding to the American provocation?

Inadvertent war is a distinct possibility, of course: Both Israel and Saudi Arabia are experiencing domestic leadership crises. Israel may overreach, and America may overreach, too, in its desire to support Israel. Indeed the constant portrayal of the US President as Putin’s puppet is pursued, of course, to taunt Trump into proving the opposite - by authorizing some or other action against Russia – albeit against his better instincts.

 At the Munich Security Conference, PM Netanyahu said:

“For some time I've been warning about this development [Iran’s alleged plan to complete a Shi’i crescent] I’ve made clear in word and deed that Israel has red lines it will enforce. Israel will continue to prevent Iran from establishing a permanent military presence in Syria … We will act without hesitation to defend ourselves. And we will act, if necessary, not just against Iran's proxies that are attacking us, but against Iran itself.” 

And, at the same conference, US National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster warned Saturday against increased Iranian efforts to support its proxies in the Middle East, saying the “time is now” to act against Tehran.

But what did McMaster mean by “time is now to act”?  Is he encouraging Israel to attack Hizbullah or Iranian-linked forces in Syria?  This, almost certainly, would lead to a three or four front war for Israel; yet there are good grounds for believing that the Israeli security establishment does not want to risk a three front war.  Possibly, McMaster was thinking more of full-spectrum hybrid, or COIN war, but not conventional war, especially since Israel cannot, any longer (after the shoot down of its F16), be sure of its air dominance, without which, it cannot expect, or hope, to prevail.

As senior Israeli officials complain about the gap between US rhetoric and action, General Josef Votel, the commander of Centcom, stated explicitly, by way of confirmation of the differing view, at a hearing in Congress on 28 February that, “countering Iran is not one of the coalition missions in Syria”. 

" Trump’s Saudi Scheme Unravels" - Alastair Crooke

 

"And, maybe MbS and Kushner thought Netanyahu spoke for Israel when he promised to be a partner in the front against Hezbollah and Iran? Was it the “grand plan” that was affirmed between Netanyahu and Trump on the day before the latter launched his United Nations broadside at Iran in September? When in fact, while any Israeli Prime Minister can wage war against the Palestinians with a relatively free hand, the same is not true where the state of Israel itself is being put at stake. No Israeli P.M. can commit to a possibly existential conflict (for Israel), without having broad support from the Israeli political and security establishment. And the Israel Establishment will only contemplate war when it is plainly in the Israeli interest, and not merely to please MbS or Mr Trump.

Ben Caspit (and other Israeli commentators) confirm that the Israeli establishment does not see war with Hezbollah, and the risk of a wider conflict, to be in the Israeli interest.

The fallout from this episode is highly significant. It has exposed that Israel presently is deterred from contemplating a war in the region (as Caspit explains). It too has underlined the hollowness of MbS ambitions to mount a “Sunni Alliance” against Iran; and it has undercut President Trump’s containment policy for Iran. For now, at least, we may expect Iran and Russia to consolidate the state in Syria, and to stabilize the northern tier. Caspit’s “war of Armageddon” may yet arrive – but not for now, perhaps."  Crooke

-------------

An eloquent contemplation of the interaction of career Borgists (foreign policy establishment) in Washington with the crowd of enthusiastic amateurs who are DJT's true inner circle.  Kushner, Bibi and MbS thought up this idea of a "Sunni Alliance,' sold it to DJT and then went forth to re-shape the world.  My God! What an absurdity!

If Crooke is right about this cabal of dunces, the notion circulating that people like Mattis, McMaster, Tillerson, Pence are effective minders for Trump preventing the worst of his potential rogue elephant behavior is just completely wrong.  If Crooke is right, then Trump ran this little "caper" all by hisself with the help of "the fam" as Bill Murray once called it.

I would agree with Crooke that the Sunni Alliance as he formulates it was always silly.

1.  Saudi Arabia is worthless as military muscle. Yemen! Yemen! Yemen!  Had anyone in the cabal noticed that the Saudis have fallen on their asses in Yemen?  To launch Saudi and other Gulfie legions at Iran would be precisely like throwing eggs at a brick wall. 

2.  As Crooke writes, Israel really IS deterred by Hizbullah's potentially murderous rocket and missile fire from hardened positions in Lebanon.  the Israelis are far too smart not to know that.  Their ambition in this cabal was likely to find others to do their fighting for them while they made threatening noises.   pl  

https://consortiumnews.com/2017/11/17/trumps-saudi-scheme-unravels/

Phase Three of Operation Big Dawn - TTG

“BEIRUT, LEBANON (2:30 P.M.) – The Syrian Arab Army (SAA) has kicked off the third phase of Operation Big Dawn, tonight, a source told Al-Masdar News.

According to the Syrian military, the army is going to push from the Hamimah area of southeast Homs towards the border-city of Albukamal in the Deir Ezzor Governorate.

While the Syrian Army has not yet stormed the T-2 Pumping Station, they have begun firing a barrage of missiles and artillery shells towards the Islamic State’s positions.

In the coming hours, the Russian Air Force will begin pounding the T-2 Pumping Station, while the Syrian Army’s infantry storms the Islamic State’s last positions in the Hamimah area.”  (Published on 16/09/2017 by Al Masdar News)

*******************

I think the next goal of this offensive is to take the entire Euphrates valley from Deir Ezzor to Al Bukamal. The drive towards the T2 pumping station is only one step in this offensive. SAA and allied forces have linked with Iraqi forces along the border and are coordinating their dual pushes toward Al Bukamal and Al Qaim. IS reactions to these moves now seem to be limited to spoiling raids. A recent IS “counteroffensive” towards Hamimah ended in failure with half their vehicles destroyed by Russian and Syrian airstrikes. The IS is sucking bilge water.

At Deir Ezzor, the SAA has secured the area around the airport. The last pocket of IS jihadis are now surrounded with their backs to the Euphrates. Their only choices are to swim for it or wait for the loving embrace of Issam Zahreddine’s mighty arms. Two large transport planes have already landed with supplies for SAA forces. More are sure to come. 

Saker Island has been captured clearing the way for an SAA river crossing. A Russia24 video shows two pontoon sections being launched in the river and possibly being used to ferry R+6 troops and technicals across the river. The video also shows an old PTS-2 amphibious cargo carrier carrying troops. My guess is that this was part of the operation to secure Saker Island rather than the crossing of the Euphrates. 

However, I do see  the establishment of a functioning pontoon bridge and ferry service to move a large force to the east bank of the Euphrates taking place soon.  I envision a major R+6 advance south on both sides of the Euphrates towards Al Mayadin rather than an R+6 thrust due east to cut off and further YPG/SDF southerly advance. There are reports of the ISIS Hunters already sending a force across the river. Eyes on the prize, boys, eyes on the prize.

TTG

https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/breaking-syrian-army-launches-third-phase-operation-big-dawn-deir-ezzor/

https://southfront.org/syrian-and-iraqi-forces-planning-joint-attack-on-isis-border-strongholds-of-al-qaim-and-al-bukamal/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/first-seen-footage-syrian-army-crossing-euphrates-river/

https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/breaking-elite-syrian-troops-reach-east-bank-euphrates-deir-ezzor/

A Syrian Cordon Sanitaire: Is Israel huffing & puffing, or is it serious ? Alastair Crooke

   

Israel has backtracked on the Amman ‘ceasefire’ agreement negotiated by the US, Russia and Jordan. The latter established the outline for a de-escalation zone in south-west Syria. From the outset, this accord was all about Israel, and its Jordanian junior partner.  Initially, Israel said ‘yes’, (and participated in some of the discussions), but earlier this week the Israeli PM had a change of mind. Israel now says that the ceasefire (which has been holding up well) is a very bad deal for Israel – and that none of its security demands were met. Ben Caspit, a senior Israeli commentator, quotes a source familiar with the matter: “This is not just some disagreement. This is a real clash, pitting Israel against Russia and the United States. It reflects Israel's conspicuous disappointment with the way that the Americans let Putin outmaneuver them, leading to the sellout of Israeli interests in the Golan Heights and Lebanon versus the Shiite axis.”  

The reverse is true: in fact the Amman negotiators’ intent from the outset had been to halt the Syrian army and its partner forces – on a roll, taking back swathes of its sovereign territory, as insurgent forces melted away – from getting too close to the Golan armistice line.  American negotiators at the talks were plain enough: the US had only two objectives in the talks – to protect Israel, and to defeat ISIS.  And these aims were fully reflected in the provisional agreement that froze the conflict, and imposed a "no foreign fighters” cordon of 20 kms on the Syrian side of the Golan armistice line and the Syrian-Jordanian border (that would exclude Iranian, Lebanese and Iraqi militia) for a defined period of time. Furthermore, this entire zone would be monitored and enforced by Russian police forces. 

On the face of it, the US negotiators did the job that they had set out to do. So, why is Israel backtracking, and escalating – post hoc – its demands ?  It now says that it will not tolerate a permament Iranian or Hizbullah presence in Syria - at all. The former head of the Israeli NSC has said explicity that Israel may use military force to halt any bases being established.  

Plainly, Netanyahu is disappointed and angry. His hopes for a Saudi-led, “Sunni" coalition that would confront, contain and roll-back Iranian influence - have imploded with the mess that constitutes the present intra-GCC fratricide. Equally, his hopes for a logistics corridor and buffer - running along the north of the Syrian-Iraqi border and extending to the Euphrates river - collapsed when the Iraqi government, angered by President Trump’s launch of an explicit anti-Shi’a alliance in Riyadh (when he bundled PMU militia and Hizbullah as principal actors in the terrorist problem), tipped the balance.  The Iraqi government gave the PMU the green light to open the Iraqi-Syrian border from both sides. 

I would guess that Netanyahu scents that Israel’s part in the Syrian conflict is inching towards an endgame – and that the future no longer portends a weak Syria, riven with Israeli-friendly jihadi forces, balkanising the territory, as expected. But rather, a Syria fully connected with Hizballah, Iran, and now, with an increasingly pro-active, if inchoate, Iraqi PMU constellation. 

Is Israel, in its frustration, then thinking to impose its own buffer zone, as it did in southern Lebanon?  At a guess, probably ‘no’. The lesson of southern Lebanon is still too raw to contemplate a ‘physical’ buffer zone. An Israeli troop presence in southern Syria would be an open invitation to guerrilla action, in order to repulse the invaders.  The threats from the Israeli PM, more likely, are an attempt to change the Syria ‘rules of the game’ – to broaden Israel’s military license to act unilaterally and without accountability, in the SW zone of Syria in support of their Israel-friendly jihadis around Quneitra. In practice, this has already begun – albeit under the pretext of Israel responding to cross-border ‘stray fire’. 

Possibly, Israel now presumes that the US Administration has lost patience with the regime-change agenda for Damascus (given the collapse of the Saudi-led GCC front).  Washington prefers a quick public victory over ISIS in Raqa’a – and then largely to wash its hands of Syria. US eyes are moving-on -- Trump has just decided to scrap the ‘covert’ CIA to arm “moderate” Syrian “rebels”. 

So PM Netanyahu probably is trying to salvage what he can of his anti-Iran campaign. On Tuesday, the White House issued a statement pushing Congress to authorise new ‘temporary' intermediate staging facilities in Iraq and Syria ‘as a part of the US-led campaign against the Islamic State’ (details on existing US bases have just been released by Turkey). But, as Corri Zoli, director of research at Syracuse University’s Institute for National Security and Counterterrorism told Al-Monitor.