U.S. Secretary of state John Kerry regrets his position in the Syrian issue “is not backed by a serious threat of a military solution to the conflict.” On Saturday, October 1, reported, citing a 40-minute audio recording of the meeting, the head of American diplomacy, and two dozen representatives of the Syrian humanitarian organizations.
Meeting behind closed doors took place on 22 September in new York, on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly. In other words, a few days after the expiry of ceasefire between the government forces of Syria and the opposition.
“His frustration and disagreement with the White house is hardly a secret, but on the record, Kerry openly laments that he was outsmarted by the Russians,” — says The New York Times.
The “trick” is that the Americans, in recognition of the Secretary of state, there is no legitimate reason to attack the government of Bashar al-Assad, while Russian forces are in Syria at the invitation of the authorities.
According to Kerry, some officials of the administration of Barack Obama to block his proposals for a military solution to the Syrian issue. The U.S. Congress is also against the use of troops. “Most Americans don’t want young American citizens were dying in another country,” said Kerry.
Other “shocking”, according to the American edition, was another statement by Kerry in which he suggested that the elections in Syria should participate and the current President Bashar al-Assad, despite the fact that the official White house insists on the necessity of the departure of the Syrian leader.
At the same time, U.S. Secretary of state did not rule out that “the absence of any reaction from President Assad” to the actions of Washington will use “other mechanisms”.
Experts The New York Times believe that to fight the Assad government, US will increase the supply of heavy weapons to so-called moderate opposition. Equipment will be used in different parts of Syria “to reduce the pressure in Aleppo from Syrian government forces.”
Earlier, on 29 September, Reuters reported that the White house is considering options for more aggressive action in Syria. According to the Agency, the U.S. could permit allies in the Persian Gulf to supply the rebels with more advanced weaponry. Also, allegedly not ruled out a shot at the military air base the Syrian government, although it may lead to losses among the Russian military.
What is behind the words of Kerry, is there any connection the United States hands power in resolving the Syrian conflict, and what can be the scenarios for this decision?
— A “closed” meeting Kerry — only performance as the leak organized in The New York Times — says a leading expert of the Center for military-political research of the MGIMO Mikhail Alexandrov. All this is done to exert psychological pressure on Moscow and the Assad regime. Supposedly, Kerry is in favour of the military option, and while his plans do not give way, but the White house’s position may change if Russia and Assad persist.
It is noteworthy that in the speech Kerry no specifics — it is absolutely unclear what exactly could the US do in Syria. Not heard specific proposals from the Syrian opposition. In my opinion, this is understandable. The balance of power in the region is that the US cannot solve the Syrian issue by force without starting a major war. Perhaps even a Third world war.
It is clear that the Americans in this scenario are not interested.
“SP”: -The New York Times writes that the United States can strengthen the delivery of heavy weapons to the Syrian opposition. This will change the balance of power?
— Barely. Weapons to the Syrian opposition the Americans had supplied before. As a result, the opposition are armed not worse than Assad’s army — at least so it was until Russia began to supply to Syria the most advanced weapons.
The Syrian opposition has tanks and long-range artillery. Just when the air is dominated by Russian aircraft, tanks and artillery do not decide anything, because they can be promptly destroyed.
But to put the Syrian opposition modern air defense system — say, anti-aircraft missile system the MIM-104A Patriot, Americans can’t. Otherwise it can be interpreted as the direct US entry into the war that Washington is not at hand.
States, in theory, could supply portable anti-aircraft missiles, like FIM-92 Stinger. But such weapons are effective against helicopters, but not against bombers.
It means to change the situation complexes FIM-92 Stinger can’t. Apparently, therefore, the United States and not seek to put them. Besides the Americans, I suppose, not without reason, fear that these complexes can fall into the hands of most of these terrorist groups, not those which the US seems to be in control. And then would have an impact on and American planes.
“SP”: — the Americans can attack Syrian government troops from the air?
But then they will face the Russian VKS. And what the outcome of such a collision is not very clear. Does not the fact that the Americans will come out of it victorious. But if the States lose, it will have serious consequences. The American Empire in this case can burst at the seams, and Washington will have to start a world war to save the situation. And it’s not the result the US wants to get into Syria.
In fact, the Americans wanted to win in Syria by the hands of the local terrorist groups, as it was in Libya, but they fail. And some other options States have not.
So it comes down to the intimidation of the Russian side, including the tightening of the sanctions regime. But since Russia does not intend to retreat, the United States should ease the pressure, to sit down at the negotiating table and discuss viable options for the Syrian settlement.
“SP”: — If the States refuse, as the situation will develop?
— Bashar al-Assad could win, if Aleppo will fall. In addition, now under attack were in Saudi Arabia, in connection with the decision of Congress to allow to sue Riyadh to families of Americans killed in the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001. Let me remind you that most of the terrorists involved in the September 11 attacks really were citizens of Saudi Arabia.
If the claims of Americans will meet, the relationship between Washington and Riyadh will be completely ruined. And who knows whether after that, Saudi Arabia to continue the same course, or try to negotiate with Russia.
“SP”: — Under what conditions States can decide on a ground operation in Syria?
— Before the election of a new President, they just do not dare. But in principle, such an operation is possible — if the United States agreed with Russia, and connect NATO allies. In this case, all parties will introduce ground troops in Syria, and Syria’s territory is divided into zones of occupation.
We have such a scenario at hand: in this case we will monitor the tidbits in Latakia, Damascus, Aleppo. And the States are unable to Kurdish areas, and the area of the desert with the “Islamic state” * in the bargain. In this case, I think the terrorists are the Americans really kill…
— The soft power option that can go the US — is air strikes on Syrian government forces — said the doctor of military Sciences, President of Academy of geopolitical problems Konstantin Sivkov. — Such situation, I will remind, has occurred on 17 September near the Syrian city of Deir-ez-Zor. Then two American F-16 and two A-10 attack aircraft, one of which belonged to the Australian air force, attacked the positions of government troops. Killing more than 80 soldiers, and about 100 were injured.
But if such incidents become regular, Russia may refer to the Syrian army our anti-aircraft system s-400 “Triumph” together with the Russian staff. This move quickly put an end to the actions of the allied air forces. Plus, in this case, the Russian VKS will strike on positions of Pro-us Syrian opposition.
However, this option is fraught with the fact that with high probability becomes more rigid. And then there is the risk of direct fire collision of the Russian Federation and the United States.
Such armed conflict will be fraught with losses for the United States, and significant: it will be about several dozen combat aircraft. But the Russian group in this case will be defeated. Simply because to provide a little bit more affordable terms of its functioning almost impossible.
In this scenario, there is no doubt that Turkey-a NATO member — will block the Straits, and cut our supply lines. But the Americans can quickly be customized in Syria three carrier, plus the existing airfields in Turkey and Saudi Arabia that are now used by the U.S. air force.
As a result, against our 40 aircraft will be involved, the pair “land” of wings of the United States is about 140 machines. Plus three strike wing, based on aircraft carriers is a minimum of 180 cars (60 on each of the carriers).
Presumably, the actions of the American aircraft will be preceded by a missile attack. It can be up to 200 missiles BGM-109 Tomahawk sea-launched that Americans will easily punch a corridor to the Russian air defense system will destroy our system s-400 will deliver a considerable part of Russian aircraft directly at the airport.
After this defeat of our group will be a matter of a few hours.
Russia the answer to that is nothing, but to start a major war with the possible use of nuclear weapons. However, the US is in this situation will become accomplices of international terrorism that threatens Americans monstrous political losses.
These two factors, I think, deter US military activity on the Syrian track. In fact, Washington is in a position of zugzwang. If he does not go to the hard option, it loses influence in Syria and the Arab world. If it is in danger of entering into a nuclear argument with Russia. In this scenario, a partition of Syria seems to be almost the only option…
