Massive War Games Planned Off Syrian Coast

Topher Morrison

PurpleSerf.com

Iran, Syria, Russia and China are planning the “biggest-ever wargames in the Middle East,” according to an unconfirmed report on the semi-official Iranian news site Fars News. A Syrian official denied the claims, however, China and Russia have come to the aid of both countries in recent months at the UN Security Council, vetoing military intervention in Syria and expanded sanctions on Iran.

According to the report this new axis, as it were, are preparing 90,000 troops, 400 aircraft and 1,000 tanks for the massive joint maneuvers, which are to take place along the Syrian coast within a month.

It has been recently reported that Russian armament sales will continue unabated to Syria including shipment of refurbished Cold War era attack helicopters.  The shipment has been reported to have turned back off the Scotland coast after losing its insurance due to the controversial nature of its mission, however, its transponder has since been turned off and verification cannot be achieved.  It is possible the armaments are still on their way to Syria.

Russia’s tacit support of the Bashar al Assad regime has the US State Department dismayed, however, in light of covert training, funding and harboring militant opposition elements in Turkey, a NATO member, the western nations are hardly blameless in the intervention.  It has been reported that presumably US, UK, France, Jordan and Turkey have Special Operations Forces in Syria since at least December of 2011 training opposition forces and providing reconnaissance.  Outfinanced and outgunned and fearing another Libyan style multilateral qu d’etat Iranian Quds Force and Russian SOF have also been reported providing similar assistance to the Syrian military.

Russian interests in the region center around the deep sea ports of Tartus and Latakia.  In 2007 Russia endeavored to reestablish a permanent naval presence in the Mediterranean for the first time since the Cold War.  Needless to say the prospect alarmed many in Washington and Tel Aviv.  China has a similar and potentially sticky port access issue in Gwadar, Pakistan in a region where NATO and US forces are waging a full-blown drone war and are covertly, as in Syria, aiding opposition forces.  It has been speculated that this Balochistan region could change Sino-US strategic equations significantly.  An effort in Congress to drive a wedge between the region and the Pakistani government in Islamabad was shelved in February – at least for now.

The Fars News report of war games states that Russian “atomic submarines and warships, aircraft carriers and mine-clearing destroyers as well as Iranian battleships and submarines will also arrive in Syria” and that Egypt has agreed to let 12 Chinese warships cross the Suez Canal for the exercises.  Considering US designs to deny Chinese naval freedom out of Pakistani ports and therefore projection into the Indian Ocean and Persian Gulf China has a vested interest in aiding Russia and its claims to access the Mediterranean.

Syria meanwhile faces international pressure, predominantly from the West’s NATO member nations, to end a 15-month crackdown on local rebels trying to oust Syrian President Bashar Assad.  But this is of course more than about “rebels.”  The small wars of the last decade are mere peons on the grand chessboard, however, it looks as though larger pieces are being moved into place.

To understand the containment policy I invite you to read NATO's Ring of Fire: The Western Flank and Russia and its follow up The Eastern Flank, China and the Indian "Linchpin."

You may even wish to delve further into America's Pacific Century: Containing China and indulge in an informative analysis of US hegemonic machinations in a new video from Nile Bowie and Global Research TV.

NATO's Ring of Fire: The Eastern Flank, China and the Indian "Linchpin"

Topher Morrison

PurpleSerf.com

Chinese President Hu Jintao

China is a poor juggernaut by most standards, albeit with extraordinary bright spots.  China's rise has been steady since the days of Mao Zedong and if you ask around the developed world most will tell you they believe it's the top economic power reflecting a rising public image rather than a reality.  Americans, for instance, know nearly everything is "Made in China," but most could scarcely fathom the immensity of many of its cities.  In 18 years it is predicted that China will have over 221 cities boasting over 1 million residents.

China is no doubt standing tall these days and looking forward to the day when it, by objective standards, reclaims its historical role as the largest economy in the world.  One of the most ancient cultures on Earth, China is ready to take a position of leadership once again and if not globally, at the very least, within the region.

It's "near peer", the United States, currently enjoying the largest and most advanced economy on Earth with commensurate hegemony, is no doubt watching these developments with much caution and anxiety.

This is a layout of just some of the players involved in the Sino-Russian
containment zone NATO and the U.S. are attempting to install.
The real containment sphere, as it were, is 4-dimensional
 incorporating land, sea, air, space, and the internet.

Eastern Flank, South China Sea

China for one understands the U.S.’s “Global Force for Good” – as the Navy’s advertisement heralds - has held dominion over the Pacific since the end of World War II.  The Chinese Navy has also recently recognized the Obama administration’s focus on the Pacific and away from over a decade in the Middle East.

The Taiwan Straight crisis of 1996, during the Clinton administration, provided China with an impetus for investing in “anti-access, area denial” technologies.  China has since been rapidly developing its own indigenous warfare technologies to ebb American hegemony in the area and secure what it believes are traditional Chinese claims on its peripheries believed to be rich in natural resources.

To that effect China has recently tested a wide range of cutting edge armaments.  The most startling development is referred to as the “Carrier Killer” – the DF-21D – designed to arc into the stratosphere and explode onto the deck of a U.S. carrier.  China has also retrofitted and sea trialed a retired Russian aircraft carrier, debuted its first stealth fighter last August and overall has increased its military expenditures substantially.

Since 2002 China’s submarine fleet, according to the Rand Corporation, has increased from eight to 29.  In 2006 these submarines became so quiet that one was able to surface amidst a small fleet of U.S. subs hitherto undetected, causing quite a stir.  In the darkest of suspicions some have speculated whether the missile seen off the coast of Los Angeles in 2010 was an in-your-face example of this deep threat.

It was recently reported China announced how it would go to war against the U.S. fleet should it feel the need to do so.  By firing multiple missiles at the same time, no doubt deploying the Carrier Killer (when it’s ready), China would prevent U.S. aircraft carriers and their fighter jets from being able to penetrate Chinese territory.

In response, the U.S. Navy is developing long-range carrier drones in the hopes of eventually providing a fleet of pilotless bombers.  The U.S. military and NASA in a partial realization of that goal just test flew the Phantom Eye – “a ginormous, hydrogen powered uber-drone” able to stay in the air for 4 days at an altitude of 65,000 feet.  It is not deployable from an aircraft carrier yet, but you get the picture.

Outside of direct U.S. confrontation the South China Sea is seeing an arms race reminiscent of the Cold War.  It is clear China’s ravenous appetite for natural resources is whetting an appetite for military grade technology.  Defense industries’ top arms dealers are hurrying to meat the demand as the nations of Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, Philippines, and Singapore among others were all courted recently in at an international arms expo:

Eastern Flank, The South Pacific

In the final analysis of the Eastern flank surrounding China and Russia, it is important to note that as China’s brown water navy evolves into a long range blue water force U.S. “mutual defense” treaties with the Philippines, Japan and Taiwan will overlap.  But the U.S. is no longer the only player in the region, NATO has just gone global and has expanded into the Pacific, signing a partnership deal with New Zealand.

With thousands of U.S. Marines now being stationed in Australia, its Navy looking forward to access at Port Darwin in the north and more Aussie troop commitments Sec. Gen. Rassmussen’s words weigh heavy on the region.  “Australia and New Zealand may be far away geographically, but they are very close to us in terms of values and commitment. Together, we will discuss how we can come even closer together.”  As the Pacific becomes more crowded the opportunity for butting heads grows by leaps and bounds.

The Indian “Linchpin”

Last weekend Tim Roemer, former ambassador to India, opined in the Washington Post about the improving ties with the largest democracy on the planet – India.  However, rather than elucidate his audience on the economic opportunities first he detailed the U.S. tactical relationship just three paragraphs in.

“Security cooperation has never been better.  The United States and India share unprecedented amounts of highly sensitive intelligence and have started a homeland security dialogue; the United States has joined in more combined defense exercises with India than with any other ally.  Defense sales are at record levels.  We also have historic new collaboration on nuclear nonproliferation issues.” (emphasis supplied)

To be sure, this part of the world is swarming with American Special Forces, in fact, they are in five South Asian countries: Nepal, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Maldives and India.  The Pentagon says it is “working closely” with India’s elite units, preparing them for showdowns with Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Pakistan based militant group blamed for the 2008 Mumbai attacks with ties to the ubiquitous and ever resilient forever enemy – Al-Qaeda.  As NATO nations withdraw troops Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta welcomes a larger role for India in Afghanistan.

As this article was being finished Leon Panetta literally took the words right off the title and affirmed everything we suspected.  While virtually all available geography available is covered in the Pacific Rim the most populous nation with nearly the largest economy outside China remains at an arm’s distance.  It is Panetta’s goal to change that vowing today to expand defense ties with India in order to safeguard the “crossroads” of the global economy.

“For this relationship to truly provide security for this region and for the world, we will need to deepen our defense and security cooperation. This is why I have come to India,” Mr. Panetta told an audience at the Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses.  While analysts see India preferring some prudent breathing room Panetta sees that the relationship “can and should become more strategic, more practical, and more collaborative.”

Considering China has claimed, at least for now, its own strategic keystone in the partnership with Pakistan and the deep port of Gwadar India might be a little more receptive to U.S. overtures.  According to Brahma Chellaney, professor of strategic studies at the Centre for Policu Research in New Delhi:

"China is trying to undercut the U.S.'s numerous interests in Pakistan…Gwadar was the linchpin of [the] 'string of pearls' strategy and the latest news adds to that.  India faces a unique challenge that no other country does.  Its two nuclear armed neighbors are closely aligned and are stepping up joint military programs. India will have to step up its deterrent capabilities."

As we have outlined the first chain islands nearest to China, with few exceptions, are within the U.S. envelope, however, the subcontinent is essential to full containment.  Panetta said the new U.S. strategy sought to ““expand [U.S.] military partnerships and [U.S.] presence in the arc extending from the Western Pacific and East Asia into the Indian Ocean region and South Asia…Defense cooperation with India is a linchpin in this strategy.”

It surely is.  Expect India to be in the news more and more.

NATO's Ring of Fire: The Western Flank and Russia

Topher Morrison

PurpleSerf.com

When it comes to the growth of domestic government it may be arguable that administrations of either Democrat or Republicans pursue different agendas, albeit usually revolving around the prevailing social issues of the day.  When it comes to foreign affairs, however, there is a seamless continuity of agenda aimed at maintaining and growing – American hegemony.

In foreign affairs at-large this American influence leads an Anglo-European coalition through its military arm – NATO.  It should be clear, however, that when NATO acts it is invariably at the behest of U.S. interests as it “contributes between one-fifth and one-quarter of NATO’s budget.  In FY2010 that contribution totaled $117.8 million…But that factors only direct payments, not deployments of personnel,” reported CBS News last year.  U.S. equity in NATO has been concentrated even more as European member nations’ contributions shrank by $45 billion over the past two years due to fiscal turmoil.

Nevertheless, NATO and its 28 member countries flexed their collective muscle last month during their summit in Chicago.  NATO announced its first step toward implementation of a ballistic missile shield, to be deployed in four phases by about 2020, sending clear signals to those not in the Club – namely China, Russia, Iran and North Korea – that amid growing security threats NATO is ready to counter any potential aggressor.  According to a statement released by NATO leaders:

"We have declared an interim ballistic missile defence capability as an initial step to establish NATO’s missile defence system, which will protect all NATO European territories, populations and forces against the increasing threats posed by the proliferation of ballistic missiles…”

Given the current threat of asymmetrical warfare from non-state actors it seems as though conventional confrontations may not be a thing of the past.

This is a layout of just some of the players involved in the Sino-Russian
containment zone NATO and the U.S. are attempting to install.
The real containment sphere, as it were, is 4-dimensional incorporating
land, sea, air, space, and the internet.

Western Flank, Europe

The U.S. and NATO now have bases and/or military operations in former Soviet spheres of influence: Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania, Lithuania, Estonia are among those little known.  Moscow, understandably rejects the idea that the NATO missile shield in this area is merely for Iran.  Russia offered to operate the missile shield jointly with NATO, but was dismissed by the alliance revealing the ruse for what it is.  NATO’s secretary general Anders Fogh Rasmussen called Russian “concerns groundless.”

Before NATO leaders met last month Russia threatened to strike the NATO missile shield should progress continue.  Despite the threats, NATO’s deputy secretary general, Alexander Vershbow, told the conference last month the shield is "not and will not be directed against Russia" and that Russia's intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM) are "too fast and too sophisticated" for the planned system to intercept.  If this is true, NATO countries will be even more vulnerable as Russia recently tested a new ICBM, which according to the Russian military improves its ability to overcome current or future missile defense systems.

Western Flank, The Middle East

It has been the plan since 1991, soon after the fall of the Soviet Union, to have the U.S. infiltrate – diplomatically or otherwise – its former client states right up to the Russian motherland.  The plan, referred to more appropriately as a “foreign policy coup,” was revealed by Gen. Wesley Clark to an audience in California in 2007.  He claims Paul Wolfowitz, then undersecretary of defense, told him that the U.S. has 5-10 years to "clean up those old Soviet client regimes, Syria, Iran, Iraq, before the next great superpower comes on to challenge us."

In 2001, the timetable was given an extension after the attacks of 9/11.  While visiting the Pentagon, a classified strategy was revealed to Gen. Clark that the U.S. planed to dismantle and replace the governments of seven nations: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Iran.  Other than Iran of course, five of the seven governments have already been deposed.

Somalia remains in the throws; corrupt, occupied by a coalition of African armies, fending off fundamentalist factions and offering little more than 21^st century pirates.  Lebanon was coaxed into uprising in 2006 through a sophisticated “color revolution” strategy piloted successfully by the likes of the U.S. government funded National Endowment for Democracy (NED) – a sort of social CIA.

And Syria as we have documented in detail is in the midst of a dangerous foreign backed insurgency focused on delegitimizing the Syrian government in the eyes of the rest of the world.  Should Syria fall, Russia will lose its only direct ports of access to the Mediterranean – Tartus and Latakia.  As late as 2007 it was revealed the Russians were to re-establish a permanent naval presence in the Mediterranean through access to these new ports.  Needless to say, this alarmed many in Washington and Tel Aviv.

A brief by Stratfor.com, a private U.S. intelligence firm, offered this analysis:

“A Russian naval presence off the Syrian coast could allow Syrian president Bashar al-Assad's regime to better inoculate itself against a potential attack by the US or Israel ... The Russians would be offering an attractive insurance policy."

Recognizing western efforts to deny Russia this access reveals that the Syrian “civil war” is really a microcosm – or if its allowed to succeed, a prelude – of World War III.  There are no less than seven countries involved in the hostilities in one way or the other and because of it Russia has recently buttressed the Assad government and Russian strategic interests with new attack helicopters, weapons and advisors.  Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Pentagon, least to say, have not welcomed the move.

Western Flank, Central Eurasia

The U.S. and NATO now have bases and/or military operations Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Kyrgyzstan among other Central Asian states including Georgia where U.S. forces are training their military.  While all these young, recently emancipated countries, are ostensibly democratic there has been evidence of rampant corruption, rigged elections and ethnic strife as can be expected from a region carved up quite arbitrarily.

The U.S. has nonetheless embraced whatever system these post-Communist orphans have come up with as long as they didn’t run back to a resurgent Russian Empire.  Afghanistan might also be included as one of these former Soviet states, but of course only for a brief period as the USSR was rebuffed and sent packing after its botched invasion during the 1980s.

The U.S. and NATO have been in Afghanistan for over ten years now.  Detractors scratch their heads and wonder why the U.S. would be sucked into another Vietnam, mired in scandal and setbacks.  Some call it a quagmire, however, a sober assessment might conclude we were never intended to leave.  Afghanistan, amidst this vast containment strategy is an ideal outpost.  It sits atop trillions of dollars of mineral reserves, a crossroads for oil essential oil pipelines and offers a perfect peak into Russia and China.

Since NATO hasn’t been the best houseguest, killing hundreds of civilians and military personnel in the most aggressive drone war to date, Pakistan is no longer willing to serve as a NATO supply conduit.  NATO and the U.S. military will now use a “reverse transit” through three former Soviet satellites (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan) to ship military equipment out of Afghanistan bypassing Pakistan altogether.  The move is purportedly six times more expensive.  Whether this is a bonafide exit route or merely a way of creating better partnerships closer to Russia remains to be seen.

What is clear is that Pakistan serves a similar role to China as Syria serves Russia – naval access.  While many are talking about Syria few are talking about the fact the Pentagon admits the U.S. is at war in Pakistan.  While the cover story is of course the favored fiction – Al-Qaeda reigns in Pakistan – groups, which are funded by staunch pro U.S. allies Saudi Arabia and UAE, the ultimate goal is denial of access as much as it is in Syria.

The Wall Street Journal reported last year that the Port of Gwadar, in coastal Balochistan region of Pakistan, is scheduled to be the latest in China’s “’String of Pearls’ wherein China has also funded construction or upgrades of ports in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Myanmar,” a stratagem aimed at strengthening economic ties, securing access to crucial resources and projecting force into the Indian Ocean, Arabian Gulf and the African Continent.

As the U.S. exits (at least publicly) its relationship with Pakistan, China is taking over.  In addition to the Port of Gwadar China sees the Iran-Pakistan pipeline, the Turkmentistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) pipeline as vital to its economic health.  To this end China has delivery of 50 JF-17 fighter jets, a unspecified number of 4,400 ton frigates, submariner training and possibly China’s more advanced FC-20, also known as the J10, but details are thin.  In the final analysis Balochistan has been and will continue to be the victim (like Syria) of subversion, destabilization and political sabotage, "a nexus," writes Eric Draitser at Stop Imperialism, "the point at which diametrically opposing strategic interests converge."  These are the typical tools of the realist school of geopolitics.

Part II will cover the South China Sea, the South Pacific and India, the Asian linchpin.