Russia arms Syria with powerful ballistic missiles
Reply
Category Archives: Russia
The final conflict: Iran threatens action against the U.S. if it attacks Syria
Posted by The Extinction Protocol: 2012 and beyond
The End is near? “The Islamic revolution was a great leap in leading the people and reaching the climax of history.” -President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, 12, 2006
September 1, 2012 – TEHRAN – Iran would take action if the United States were to carry out an act of “stupidity” and attack Syria, an Iranian military official was quoted as saying on Saturday, but the comments later disappeared from the state-linked agency website. Iran has steadfastly supported Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in his bid to suppress an uprising which both Tehran and Damascus see as a proxy war by Israel and Western states to extend their influence in the Middle East. “If America were to attack Syria, Iran along with Syria’s allies will take action, which would amount to a fiasco for America,” Mohammad Ali Assoudi, the deputy for culture and propaganda of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), was quoted as saying. Assoudi’s comments were first carried by the government-linked news agency Young Journalists’ Club but were later apparently taken down from the group’s website. The comments were picked up by Iranian news sites including Iran’s Jam-e Jam newspaper and the BBC’s Persian-language site. Iranian officials were not immediately available for comment. Assoudi did not specify exactly what steps Iran would take, but said Syria’s allies would implement their joint military pact in the case of a U.S. attack. “In the case of American stupidity and a military attack by this country on Syria, the joint military pact of Syria’s allies would be implemented,” Assoudi said. Iran and Syria signed a mutual defense pact in 2006, but little is known of its details, or whether there are any other signatories. The Islamic Republic considers Assad’s government, along with Lebanese Shi’ite militant group Hezbollah, part of an “axis of resistance” against the influence of the United States and Israel in the Middle East. But while Turkey, Gulf Arab countries and Western states admit to giving non-weapons aid to the Syrian rebels, there is little or no appetite in Washington, especially in an election year, for direct military intervention in Syria. Without U.S. leadership, its allies also appear unwilling to go it alone. Iran accuses Western powers and regional states of supporting and arming the rebels, while the rebels accuse Iran of sending IRGC fighters to help Assad crush the uprising. “With cooperation from Qatar, Turkey and Saudi Arabia, America has the goal of striking a blow against Syria and making preparations for the fall of the Syrian government,” Assoudi said. –Reuters
Iran and N. Korea in one trench against common foe:Iran and North Korea have signed an agreement to collaborate in the fields of science and technology, showing that nearly a decade of US efforts to isolate the two states internationally might have actually pushed them closer together. Iranian state television said President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and North Korea’s nominal head of state Kim Yong Nam were both present in Tehran for the signing of the agreement on Saturday. The two states will cooperate in biotechnology, engineering, renewable energy, sustainable development, research, joint laboratories and the environment, and facilitate more student exchanges, Reuters cites Iranian Labor News Agency (ILNA) as saying. On the same day, Iran’s First Vice President Mohammad Reza Rahimi called for the strengthening of economic ties between the two states, the agency cites Iranian state TV as reporting. North’s Korea’s No. 2 was in Tehran along with 119 other world leaders for the 16th Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement. The summit, whose agenda included nuclear disarmament, human rights and the Syrian conflict, is one of the few multilateral forums in which Pyongyang participates. It had previously been speculated that North Korea’s supreme leader Kim Jong-un would be in attendance. Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei met with Kim Yong Nam and was quick to underscore the force underpinning growing collaboration between the two states. “The Islamic Republic of Iran and North Korea have common enemies, because the arrogant powers do not accept independent states,” the ILNA quoted Khamenei as saying. Khamenei’s harsh rebuke was most almost certainly targeted at the United States, which vilified the two states as being part of an “Axis of Evil” (along with Iraq) in 2002 despite the lack of any overt ties between the three states. Iranian and North Korean officials have previously characterized their countries as being in “one trench” in the fight against the United States and the West. Western powers have accused them, meanwhile, of being close partners in nuclear and missile technologies. –RT News
World at dangerous crossroads for WW3: Whatever action the U.S. takes in the Middle East, whether against Iran itself or Syria; Iran is now determined to enlarge the conflict into an Armageddon war (Al-Malhamah Al-Kubrah) that will result in the destruction of Israel, the U.S, and will cleanse the Middle East of western influence, whilel ushering in the reign of the 12th Iman. This crisis is already now that dangerous. “Ahmadinejad has aligned himself with the virtually invincible combined power of the East: Russia, China, North Korea, and to some extent, even India; making any potential future conflict in the area, involving Iran, a dangerous trip-wire for dragging other nations into the conflict. The future of the Middle East hangs in the balance, awaiting the outcome of this Iran-Israel high-stakes game of Stratego. A miscalculation by either side holds the potential for global disaster.” –The Extinction Protocol, page 82
REPORT: RUSSIAN NUCLEAR ATTACK SUB PATROLLED WATERS OFF GULF FOR A MONTH…UNDETECTED
Jonathon M. Seidl
A file picture taken in Brest harbor, western France, on September 21, 2004, shows the Vepr Russian nuclear submarine of the Project 971 Shchuka-B type, or Akula-class (Shark) by NATO classification , the same type as the Nerpa Russian nuclear submarine. Russia has handed over the nuclear-powered attack submarine Nerpa to India at a ceremony that followed more than two years of delays, a source in the naval chief of staff told ITAR-TASS today. Credit: AFP/Getty Images
A Russian, nuclear-powered attack sub patrolled the waters of the Gulf of Mexico, off the U.S. coast, undetected for a month, a new startling report from the Washington Free Beacon says.
The sub, the Free Beacon says, is an Akula vessel loaded with cruise missiles and is one of the quietest in the Russian fleet.
From the report:
The stealth underwater incursion in the Gulf took place at the same time Russian strategic bombers made incursions into restricted U.S. airspace near Alaska and California in June and July, and highlights a growing military assertiveness by Moscow.
The submarine patrol also exposed what U.S. officials said were deficiencies in U.S. anti-submarine warfare capabilities—forces that are facing cuts under the Obama administration’s plan to reduce defense spending by $487 billion over the next 10 years.
The Navy is in charge of detecting submarines, especially those that sail near U.S. nuclear missile submarines, and uses undersea sensors and satellites to locate and track them.
The fact that the Akula was not detected in the Gulf is cause for concern, U.S. officials said.
[...]
“The Akula was built for one reason and one reason only: To kill U.S. Navy ballistic missile submarines and their crews,” said a second U.S. official.
“It’s a very stealthy boat so it can sneak around and avoid detection and hope to get past any protective screen a boomer might have in place,” the official said, referring to the Navy nickname for strategic missile submarines.
If confirmed, this isn’t the first time the Russians have made such a bold move recently. In 2009,the New York Times reported two other nuclear-powered attack subs were found to have patrolled the eastern seaboard, about 200 miles off the coast.
“It’s a confounding situation arising from a lack of leadership in our dealings with Moscow,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) told the Free Beacon. “While the president is touting our supposed ‘reset’ in relations with Russia, Vladimir Putin is actively working against American interests, whether it’s in Syria or here in our own backyard.”
Sackcloth&Ashes Obama CONFIRMS COVENANTonTISHA B’Av The 9th of Av A day of CALAMITY!
HAS ISREAL ENTERED INTO A COVENANT WITH DEATH ON JULY 27, 2012 THE 9TH OF AV???
***DANIEL 9…..27 could be seen as the 9th of Av…July 27th….9…27!!!!
H.R. 4133: United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/hr4133/text
Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves:
Isa 28:15
BREAKING NEWS 7/27 Obama SIGNS bill to STRENGTHEN SECURITY cooperation with Israel
H.R. 4133, the United States-Israel Enhanced Security Cooperation Act of 2012
http://www.gop.gov/bill/112/2/hr4133
THIS BILL SPECIFICALLY STATES IT IS MEANT TO ASSIST IN A NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENT OF THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT THAT RESULTS IN TWO STATES LIVING SIDE BY SIDE IN PEACE AND SECURITY!!!!
IT IS AMAZING THAT THIS OCCURRED ON JULY 27TH THE 9TH OF AV (TISH B’ AV) WHICH IS A DAY OF CALAMITY, WAILING, CRYING MOURNING AND TROUBLE FOR ISRAEL. MANY TRADGEDIES HAVE BEFALLEN ISRAEL ON THIS DAY: BOTH THE 1ST & 2ND TEMPLES WERE DESTROYED IN ISRAEL ON THIS DAY. WWI broke out on this day Aug 1, 1914 setting the stage for the HOLOCAUST. On the eve of TISH B’Av in 1942 marked the mass deportation of Jews from the warsaw ghetto to Treblinka.
And he shall CONFIRM the COVENANT with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
Dan 9:27
COULD THIS BE THE CONFIRMATION- STRENGTHENING OF THE COVENANT?
Strongs H1396 CONFIRM- gabar- to make strong, STRENGTHEN, to BIND,
Strongs H1285 COVENANT- bĕriyth- ALLIANCE OF FRIENDSHIP!!!, COVENANT ENTERED BETWEEN NATIONS!!!! PLEDGE, LEAGUE
The new bill calls for enhanced cooperation with Israel – the staunchest U.S. ally in the Middle East and a major beneficiary of military aid – on missile defense and intelligence, and increased access to advanced weapons.
“The bill deepens our security cooperation with Israel by expanding our military assistance and providing Israel with access to additional equipment,” Vietor said.
Section 5 tells us this extension of authority….is further amended in the item relating to ‘Loan Guarantees to Israel’–striking ‘September 30, 2011′ and inserting ‘September 30, 2015′
Interestingly these loan guarantees were SCHEDULED TO END INITIALLY in 2008 when George W. Bush Left office and Obama became President..
US LOAN GUARANTEES EXTENDED TO 2008!!!
http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/docview.asp?did=906718
At the meeting, mechanisms required by the US Congress’s decision to extend UNTIL 2008 the period during which Israel can use the US loan guarantees extended by the Bush administration were established. Israel has $3 billion left of the $9 billion in guarantees granted.
Section 3 point (1) States To REAFFIRM(CONFIRM) the enduring COMMITMENT(PROMISE, VOW, TIE, BOND) of the United States…as President Obama stated on December 16, 2011, And as President Bush stated before the Knesset on the 60th anniversary of the founding of the State of Israel on…May 15, 2008.
2008-2015 is 7years. OBAMA CONFIRMED a 7yr COVENANT!
This is not to say that the TRIBULATION started in 2008…nor does this mean that this is Daniel 9:27 fulfilled. However we must scrutinize the TRUE SIGNIFICANCE of what this could mean or be leading up to. This may be part of the underpinnings of the 7year treaty that starts the TRIBULATION.
Khamenei Warns Iran’s Top Leaders: WAR IN WEEKS
Published on Jul 31, 2012 by realdebka
Iran launches its biggest ever fortification project to protect its nuclear installations from US and/or Israeli attack which Ayatollah Ali Khamenei warned his military chiefs is only weeks away: Iran’s nuclear facilities are being buried under mountains of rocks, tons of reinforced concrete and steel sheeting.
Russian Navy to evacuate Syrian base in emergency
Published: RT 28 July, 2012, 15:06
Russian Navy amphibious landing vessel “Nikolai Filchenkov”. (Reuters / Stringer)
TRENDS:Syria unrest
TAGS: Conflict, Military, Russia, Opposition, Syria,Navy
If the lives of the personnel at the Russian naval base in the Syrian port of Tartus are put at serious risk, they may be evacuated, Russia’s Navy chief says. This comes as Russia holds a major naval drill not far from the Syrian coast.
“If an emergency happens, we will remove the base’s personnel,” Vice-Adm. Viktor Chirkov told Echo Moscow radio Saturday, when asked what the Russian military would do if the base at the Syrian port Tartus came under attack.
He added that it would be up to the Russian president to order such a move.
Earlier, Navy sources warned that Russia currently has enough capabilities to defend its base in Syria from a rebel attack. This was in response to threats from the Free Syrian Army, who said they would target the base or Russian warships directly for Russia’s support of the Syrian government.
The Tartus base is used for repair and refueling of Russian military vessels in the Mediterranean. It is currently manned by some 50 sailors and officers. The base was first established in the 1970s as part of the Soviet Union’s effort to contain growing Israeli influence in the Middle East.
The base suffered from neglect in the 1990s, but Moscow decided to beef up its military presence in the region in 2008, which meant more investment in the Tartus base. In August 2010 then-commander of the Russian Navy Vladimir Vysotsky said the base would be upgraded to service high-tonnage ships, including aircraft carriers. On Thursday, Vice-Adm. Chirkov told the media that Russia intends to preserve the base.
The Tartus base has come into media spotlight lately, after Russia launched massive naval drills in the Mediterranean Sea. The Navy deployed 20 warships and support ships for the exercise. Several of the vessels in the fleet carry units of marines on board.
Some media speculated that the ships and ground troops could be used to help Damascus in its crackdown on the opposition. Moscow denied the allegations, saying the exercise was scheduled long before the Syrian conflict escalated. The Russian fleet is not even expected to visit the Tartus base as part of the drills.
The 17-month-long armed conflict in Syria has left 16,000 people dead, according to UN estimates. The armed opposition is struggling to oust President Bashar al-Assad’s government with support from the US, some European countries, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar. The Syrian government says it is facing a covert foreign intervention.
Big Foreign Military Forces Pile Up On Syria’s Borders As War Looms
Posted by truther on July 26, 2012
Russian, Western and Arab forces were piling up on Syrian borders Wednesday, July 25, bringing closer a war confrontation which could spur the Assad regime into making good on its threat to use chemical weapons against “external aggression.”
Based on this reading, Moscow added its voice Tuesday to that of US President Obama and warned Bashar Assad against using chemical weapons in view of “its commitments under the international convention it ratified prohibiting the use of poisonous gases as a method of warfare.”
debkafile’s military sources: With operational intelligence deployment and electronic stations positioned inside Syria, the Russians are better placed than any other outsiders to know what is happening on Syria’s battlefields. Their warning must therefore be tied to solid information confirming Washington’s assessment that Assad is dangerously close to deciding to use his chemical and biological weapons in a way that would precipitate a regional conflict.
Israel, Turkey and Jordan would be the first targets on his list. The immediacy of the peril, debkafile’s military sources report, has speeded the arrival of Russian warships to Syria to counter a potential Western, Arab or Israeli assault on the embattled country.
The Russian Ministry of Defense, which rarely discloses Russian military movements outside its borders, announced early Wednesday morning, July 25 that a fleet of Russian warships had passed through the Strait of Gibraltar and entered the Mediterranean.
The fleet is headed by the anti-submarine and anti-aircraft Admiral Chabanenko warship and consists of another three vessels carrying a large number of Russian marines. This fleet will rendezvous with a Russian flotilla standing by in the Mediterranean since July 21, detached from Russian Black Fleet and composed of the Smetlivy figate and two large landing craft loaded with Russian marines. This group awaited the main force before approaching Syria.
The fact that Russia is massing large numbers of marines off the Syrian coast looks as though a landing on Syrian soil is on Moscow’s cards.
The Russian marine contingent, debkafile’s sources say, will stand ready – either to come to the aid of the Assad regime or to serve as a bargaining chip for a last-minute deal between Moscow and Washington for ending the war by establishing a transitional military regime in Damascus whose makeup would be agreed between them and Assad.
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton hinted at this possibility on Tuesday, July 24, when she said: “We do believe that it is not too late for the Assad regime to commence with planning for a transition.”
But Clinton also hinted, in a more threatening tone, that a situation is developing for the creation of safe zones in rebel-controlled areas of Syria. “More and more territory is being taken and it will, eventually, result in a safe haven inside Syria which will then provide a base for further actions by the opposition,” she said.
Clinton didn’t name the potential protectors of those havens. However, since the Syrian rebels are short of manpower, Western, Muslim or Arab defenders would have to be called in.
Wednesday, British military sources in London said the moment is rushing forward for British forces to get involved in what is happening in Syria. Iran and Turkey are not indifferent either.
Deputy Iranian Revolutionary Guard chief, Gen. Masoud Jazayeri, warned on Tuesday, July 24, that Tehran would not permit regime change in Damascus and if Syria’s enemies intervened, Iran would hit them hard. The Iranian commander pointed a finger at Saudi Arabia and Qatar, adding that the US and Israel are at the forefront of the comprehensive campaign against Syria but are being beaten back.
This was the first time Tehran had explicitly threatened military intervention in Syria.
Wednesday, Turkey shut its border crossings to Syria. Military sources in Ankara confirmed that massive Turkish military strength had been on the move toward the Syrian border.
Big Russian fleet nears Syria. Iran to fight regime change as foreign forces pile up
DEBKAfile Special Report July 25, 2012, 1:31 PM (GMT+02:00)
Russian Admiral Chabanenko warship
Russian, Western and Arab forces were piling up on Syrian borders Wednesday, July 25, bringing closer a war confrontation which could spur the Assad regime into making good on its threat to use chemical weapons against “external aggression.”
Based on this reading, Moscow added its voice Tuesday to that of US President Obama and warned Bashar Assad against using chemical weapons in view of “its commitments under the international convention it ratified prohibiting the use of poisonous gases as a method of warfare.”
DEBKAfile’s military sources: With operational intelligence deployment and electronic stations positioned inside Syria, the Russians are better placed than any other outsiders to know what is happening on Syria’s battlefields. Their warning must therefore be tied to solid information confirming Washington’s assessment that Assad is dangerously close to deciding to use his chemical and biological weapons in a way that would precipitate a regional conflict.
Israel, Turkey and Jordan would be the first targets on his list.
The immediacy of the peril, DEBKAfile’s military sources report, has speeded the arrival of Russian warships to Syria to counter a potential Western, Arab or Israeli assault on the embattled country.
The Russian Ministry of Defense, which rarely discloses Russian military movements outside its borders, announced early Wednesday morning, July 25 that a fleet of Russian warships had passed through the Strait of Gibraltar and entered the Mediterranean.
The fleet is headed by the anti-submarine and anti-aircraft Admiral Chabanenko warship and consists of another three vessels carrying a large number of Russian marines. This fleet will rendezvous with a Russian flotilla standing by in the Mediterranean since July 21, detached from Russian Black Fleet and composed of the Smetlivy figate and two large landing craft loaded with Russian marines. This group awaited the main force before approaching Syria.
The fact that Russia is massing large numbers of marines off the Syrian coast looks as though a landing on Syrian soil is on Moscow’s cards.
The Russian marine contingent, DEBKAfile’s sources say, will stand ready – either to come to the aid of the Assad regime or to serve as a bargaining chip for a last-minute deal between Moscow and Washington for ending the war by establishing a transitional military regime in Damascus whose makeup would be agreed between them and Assad.
US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton hinted at this possibility on Tuesday, July 24, when she said: “We do believe that it is not too late for the Assad regime to commence with planning for a transition.”
But Clinton also hinted, in a more threatening tone, that a situation is developing for the creation of safe zones in rebel-controlled areas of Syria. “More and more territory is being taken and it will, eventually, result in a safe haven inside Syria which will then provide a base for further actions by the opposition,” she said.
Clinton didn’t name the potential protectors of those havens. However, since the Syrian rebels are short of manpower, Western, Muslim or Arab defenders would have to be called in.
Wednesday, British military sources in London said the moment is rushing forward for British forces to get involved in what is happening in Syria. Iran and Turkey are not indifferent either.
Deputy Iranian Revolutionary Guard chief, Gen. Masoud Jazayeri, warned on Tuesday, July 24, that Tehran would not permit regime change in Damascus and if Syria’s enemies intervened, Iran would hit them hard. The Iranian commander pointed a finger at Saudi Arabia and Qatar, adding that the US and Israel are at the forefront of the comprehensive campaign against Syria but are being beaten back.
This was the first time Tehran had explicitly threatened military intervention in Syria.
Wednesday, Turkey shut its border crossings to Syria. Military sources in Ankara confirmed that massive Turkish military strength had been on the move toward the Syrian border.
Consequences of the Fall of the Syrian Regime
We have entered the endgame in Syria. That doesn’t mean that we have reached the end by any means, but it does mean that the precondition has been met for the fall of the regime of Syrian President Bashar al Assad. We have argued that so long as the military and security apparatus remain intact and effective, the regime could endure. Although they continue to function, neither appears intact any longer; their control of key areas such as Damascus and Aleppo is in doubt, and the reliability of their personnel, given defections, is no longer certain. We had thought that there was a reasonable chance of the al Assad regime surviving completely. That is no longer the case. At a certain point — in our view, after the defection of a Syrian pilot June 21 and then the defection of the Tlass clan – key members of the regime began to recalculate the probability of survival and their interests. The regime has not unraveled, but it is unraveling.
The speculation over al Assad’s whereabouts and heavy fighting in Damascus is simply part of the regime’s problems. Rumors, whether true or not, create uncertainty that the regime cannot afford right now. The outcome is unclear. On the one hand, a new regime might emerge that could exercise control. On the other hand, Syria could collapse into a Lebanon situation in which it disintegrates into regions held by various factions, with no effective central government.
The Russian and Chinese Strategy
The geopolitical picture is somewhat clearer than the internal political picture. Whatever else happens, it is unlikely that al Assad will be able to return to unchallenged rule. The United States, France and other European countries have opposed his regime. Russia, China and Iran have supported it, each for different reasons. The Russians opposed the West’s calls to intervene, which were grounded on human rights concerns, fearing that the proposed intervention was simply a subterfuge to extend Western power and that it would be used against them. The Chinese also supported the Syrians, in part for these same reasons. Both Moscow and Beijing hoped to avoid legitimizing Western pressure based on human rights considerations — something they had each faced at one time or another. In addition, Russia and China wanted the United States in particular focused on the Middle East rather than on them. They would not have minded a military intervention that would have bogged down the United States, but the United States declined to give that to them.
But the Russian and Chinese game was subtler than that. It focused on Iran. As we have argued, if the al Assad regime were to survive and were to be isolated from the West, it would be primarily dependent on Iran, its main patron. Iran had supplied trainers, special operations troops, supplies and money to sustain the regime. For Iran, the events in Syria represented a tremendous opportunity. Iran already held a powerful position in Iraq, not quite dominating it but heavily influencing it. If the al Assad regime survived and had Iranian support to thank for its survival, Syria would become even more dependent on Iran than was Iraq. This would shore up the Iranian position in Iraq, but more important, it would have created an Iranian sphere of influence stretching from western Afghanistan to Lebanon, where Hezbollah is an Iranian ally.
The Russians and Chinese clearly understood that if this had happened, the United States would have had an intense interest in undermining the Iranian sphere of influence — and would have had to devote massive resources to doing so. Russia and China benefitted greatly in the post-9/11 world, when the United States was obsessed with the Islamic world and had little interest or resources to devote to China and Russia. With the end of the Afghanistan war looming, this respite seemed likely to end. Underwriting Iranian hegemony over a region that would inevitably draw the United States’ attention was a low-cost, high-return strategy.
The Chinese primarily provided political cover, keeping the Russians from having to operate alone diplomatically. They devoted no resources to the Syrian conflict but did continue to oppose sanctions against Iran and provided trade opportunities for Iran. The Russians made a much larger commitment, providing material and political support to the al Assad regime.
It seems the Russians began calculating the end for the regime some time ago. Russia continued to deliver ammunition and other supplies to Syria but pulled back on a delivery of helicopters. Several attempts to deliver the helicopters “failed” when British insurers of the ship pulled coverage. That was the reason the Russians gave for not delivering the helicopters, but obviously the Russians could have insured the ship themselves. They were backing off from supporting al Assad, their intelligence indicating trouble in Damascus. In the last few days the Russians have moved to the point where they had their ambassador to France suggest that the time had come for al Assad to leave — then, of course, he denied having made the statement.
A Strategic Blow to Iran
As the Russians withdraw support, Iran is now left extremely exposed. There had been a sense of inevitability in Iran’s rise in the region, particularly in the Arabian Peninsula. The decline of al Assad’s regime is a strategic blow to the Iranians in two ways. First, the wide-reaching sphere of influence they were creating clearly won’t happen now. Second, Iran will rapidly move from being an ascendant power to a power on the defensive.
The place where this will become most apparent is in Iraq. For Iran, Iraq represents a fundamental national security interest. Having fought a bloody war with Iraq in the 1980s, the Iranians have an overriding interest in assuring that Iraq remains at least neutral and preferably pro-Iranian. While Iran was ascendant, Iraqi politicians felt that they had to be accommodating. However, in the same way that Syrian generals had to recalculate their positions, Iraqi politicians have to do the same. With sanctions — whatever their effectiveness — being imposed on Iran, and with Iran’s position in Syria unraveling, the psychology in Iraq might change.
This is particularly the case because of intensifying Turkish interest in Iraq. In recent days the Turks have announced plans for pipelines in Iraq to oil fields in the south and in the north. Turkish economic activity is intensifying. Turkey is the only regional power that can challenge Iran militarily. It uses that power against the Kurds in Iraq. But more to the point, if a country builds a pipeline, it must ensure access to it, either politically or militarily. Turkey does not want to militarily involve itself in Iraq, but it does want political influence to guarantee its interests. Thus, just as the Iranians are in retreat, the Turks have an interest in, if not supplanting them, certainly supplementing them.
The pressure on Iran is now intense, and it will be interesting to see the political consequences. There was consensus on the Syrian strategy, but with failure of the strategy, that consensus dissolves. This will have an impact inside of Iran, possibly even more than the sanctions. Governments have trouble managing reversals.
Other Consequences
From the American point of view, al Assad’s decline opens two opportunities. First, its policy of no direct military intervention but unremitting political and, to a lesser extent, economic pressure appears to be working in this instance. More precisely, even if it had no effect, it will appear that it did, which will enhance the ability of the United States to influence events in other countries without actually having to intervene.
Second, the current situation opens the door for a genuine balance of power in the region that does not require constant American intervention. One of the consequences of the events in Syria is that Turkey has had to reconsider its policy toward countries on its periphery. In the case of Iraq, Turkey has an interest in suppressing the Kurdistan Workers’ Party militants who have taken refuge there and defending oil and other economic interests. Turkey’s strategy is moving from avoiding all confrontations to avoiding major military commitments while pursuing its political interests. In the end, that means that Turkey will begin moving into a position of balancing Iran for its own interests in Iraq.
This relieves the United States of the burden of containing Iran. We continue to regard the Iranian sphere of influence as a greater threat to American and regional interests than Iran’s nuclear program. The decline of al Assad solves the major problem. It also increases the sense of vulnerability in Iran. Depending on how close they are to creating a deliverable nuclear weapon — and our view is that they are not close — the Iranians may feel it necessary to moderate their position.
A major loser in this is Israel. Israel had maintained a clear understanding with the al Assad regime. If the al Assad regime restrained Hezbollah, Israel would have no objection to al Assad’s dominating Lebanon. That agreement has frayed since the United States pushed al Assad’s influence out of Lebanon in 2006. Nevertheless, the Israelis preferred al Assad to the Sunnis — until it appeared that the Iranians would dominate Syria. But the possibility of either an Islamist regime in Damascus or, more likely, Lebanese-style instability cannot please the Israelis. They are already experiencing jihadist threats in Sinai. The idea of having similar problems in Syria, where the other side of the border is the Galilee rather than the Negev, must make them nervous.
But perhaps the most important losers will be Russia and China. Russia, like Iran, has suffered a significant setback in its foreign policy that will have psychological consequences. The situation in Syria has halted the foreign-policy momentum the Russians had built up. But more important, the Russian and Chinese hope has been that the United States would continue to treat them as secondary issues while it focused on the Middle East. The decline of al Assad and the resulting dynamic in the region increases the possibility that the United States can disengage from the region. This is not something the Russians or Chinese want, but in the end, they did not have the power to create the outcome in Syria that they had wanted.
The strategy of the dominant power is to encourage a balance of power that contains threats without requiring direct intervention. This was the British strategy, but it has not been one that the United States has managed well. After the jihadist wars, there is a maturation under way in U.S. strategy. That means allowing the intrinsic dynamic in the region to work, intervening only as the final recourse. The events in Syria appear to be simply about the survival of the al Assad regime. But they have far greater significance in terms of limiting Iranian power, creating a local balance of power and freeing the United States to focus on global issues, including Russia and China.
Read more: Consequences of the Fall of the Syrian Regime | Stratfor
A Full Rundown Of Russia’s Immense Military Acquisitions
Walter Hickey | Jul. 23, 2012
 The MSTA-S 2S19 |
Funded by booming oil and gas profits, Russia is in the midst of a huge equipment upgrade backed by Putin‘s promise to increase military spending by $770 billion from 2014 to 2020.
It sounds like a lot, and it is, the Russian military budget doubled from 2006 to 2009 from $25 billion to $50 billion; but it’s still not a tenth of the U.S. defense budget, which averages around $600 billion per year.
Perhaps the most interesting facet of Russian military production is that it’s a bit less refined than America‘s, more burgeoning capitalism than entrenched lobbying with the state.
Private enterprise is exporting sophisticated arms packages and entering into international contracts with foreign powers to enhance already well developed weapons program.
So while this doesn’t necessarily bring us to a new Cold War as some suggest, it should keep the U.S. aware that it’s not the only player on the world’s military stage, and in the end, that can only be a good thing.
Russia’s T-90 main battle tank tank is just as advanced as the America’s M1 and costs half as much
Produced from 1995 onward, the T-90 is a modernization of the Soviet T-72.
The overhaul is remarkable and the fact the T-90 costs anywhere from $2.8 to $4.3 million compared to the M1 Abrams $8.6 million is more remarkable still.
Manufacturer Kartsev-Venediktov has pumped the tank full of electronic warfare capabilities, and it’s filled with laser warning receivers, an electronic jamming system and a three-tiered protection system consisting of turret armor, explosive reactive armor and a full countermeasures suite.
Despite the T-90′s well advanced status it’s only a stop-gap piece. Russia’s T-99, coming by 2020, will serve as the new main battle tank, infantry fighting vehicle, and armored personnel carrier.
Production begins of the T-99 begins in 2014.
The MSTA-S 2S19 can run on six different types of fuel
While this artillery platform is pretty interesting on its own — a 152mm self propelled howitzer that entered service in 1989 — perhaps its most compelling feature is its versatility.
The 2MSTA-S 2S19 offers significant automation with loading and firing, allowing the crew to stay mobile while firing and it can run on six different types of fuel including diesel, gasoline, aviation fuel, and alcohol. Russia has 800 of them as of 2008.
The MSTA has been adapted into a number of different variants which include a wheeled variant, various enhanced versions, a “laser tank” and a prototype which includes dual howitzers.
The Sukhoi Su-35 is Russia’s most advanced operational fighter jet
The Su-35 is a twin-engined multi-role fighter. Since Russia has not been in a significant war since the aircraft’s development, the supermaneuverable jet is currently used by the nation’s Russian Knights air display team. The Russian Air Force has eleven of them, mostly an upgraded version.
The Air Forces of Libya, India, Malaysia and Algeria have considered purchasing the craft.
Exporter Rosoboronexport lost $4 billion after the Libyan revolution because of cancelled contracts, so the future of the jet outside of Russian borders remains unclear.
The Sukhoi T-50 will be Russia’s stealth fifth-generation fighter
This is the future of Russian combat aviation.
Currently a prototype T-50, the second model started flight testing in March 2011. Next year, the Defense Ministry plans to buy 10 evaluation aircraft, followed by an initial purchase of 60 jets by 2016.
The service life is projected to be three decades, and this aircraft will likely contend with the the U.S. F-35 Joint Strike Fighter jet. Still, the Russians managed to confine development costs to around $10 billion.
While less stealthy than the F-22, newspapers have claimed it is more maneuverable.
The MiG-35 has state-of-the-art radar and is all digital
The MiG-35 is a huge upgrade to the MiG-29, a jet so successful it remains in use all over the world.
It’s still in the development phase, but some Russian leaders have been completely explicit about the name: The MiG 35 is seen as a probable direct competitor to the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.
Installed on the MiG-35 will be a state-of-the art radar system developed by Phazotron. This fighter is all digital. It should be able to hit Mach 2.25 and has a range of 125 miles. It first flew in 2007.
The Mi-28 is the most advanced attack helicopter made in Asia — for now
Right now, the Mi-28 is the top attack helicopter made in Asia. It functions in any weather, by day or night, and has no other possible use beside aerial offense.
Still, the helicopter is a mere placeholder for the time being. Right now Russian Helicopters — the corporate parent of Mil — is designing the next-generation attack helicopter to bring Russian rotors out of the eighties. With China developing the Z-10 (with some help from Pratt & Whitney of course) it’s time for an upgrade.
The fifth-generation helicopter has bold goals: light, noiseless, and invisible to radar. They want to start work after the Su-35 is done.
The Antonov An-70 can haul up to 300 troops at a time
Russia has sixty of the Ukrainian aircraft on order, to be delivered sometime between 2015 and 2016. Right now Antonov has two prototypes complete. It’s able to hold 300 troops or 200 wounded.
It has got four propellers. It’s comparable to the C-130J. The project has had some significant hurdles, with Russia pulling out in 2006 before ordering sixty aircraft in 2010, consistent with the rearmament program for the new decade.
The Yasen-class of attack submarines will carry up to 32 cruise missiles
The Office of Naval Intelligence thinks the Yasen sub is the quietest in the ocean belonging to a competitor to the United States.
It’s powered by a nuclear reactor and one is currently in trials after its 2010 launch. The next is expected in the ocean before 2015. It’s been describes as state-of-the-art, and costs the Kremlin $1.2 billion each.
While the Borei-class subs will move ballistic missiles around the world, the Yasen is armed with up to thirty two cruise missiles and has ten torpedo tubes. I
The Bulava, Sineva, and Layner ballistic missiles explain why the Russians are obsessed with submarines
Russia came to the point a few years ago where it designed submarines around ballistic missiles. Right now, three submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) help define Russian naval missile defense.
The Sineva SLBM was introduced in 2007 and has an operational range of 7,100 miles. It’s designed to be launched from the Delta IV class submarines, built from 1985 to 1992.
The Bulava SLBM carries a warhead with six 150 kiloton bombs in them. They have an operational range of 6,100 miles, but since they’re stocked in the Borei-class submarines that range can be expanded far away from the Russian motherland. They are planned to enter service this year.
The Layner SLBM is being developed by the Makeyev Rocket Design Bureau. It has got 12 warheads and can allegedly pierce anti-ballistic missile defenses. It should enter service soon. It’s designed to augment, not replace the Bulava.
The Steregushchy-class corvette is the foundation of Russian coastal defense
The Steregushchy class was initially developed to replace the Grisha class of anti-submarine corvettes.
Three ships have been in service beginning in 2007. At the moment, three are under construction, and two more are expected to be exported to Algeria.
It has a helicopter hangar, eight torpedo tubes, and 12 cells for surface to air missiles of the S-400 type. The ships are currently undergoing sea-trials. With Russia charging $150 million per export ship, these vessels are a steal for the Russian Navy compared to the United States’ plannedLittoral Combat Ships which cost $2.4 billion.
The Gorshkov Frigate is a multi-role ship that will form the core of Russia’s future Navy
Right now, Severnaya Verf is building the first three of a planned 15-20 frigates for the Russian Navy. They’ll be 425 feet long with a range of 4000 nautical miles.
The plan is to replace the aging Sovremenny destroyers and Burevestnik frigates with the ships. The first frigate — the Gorshkov — was begun in 2006, launched in 2010, and will be commissioned in 2013.
The ships will have advanced radar systems, a 130mm naval gun, Oniks missiles, multiple torpedo tubes, and will hold one helicopter.
Russia focuses on four theaters for their Navy. They have a Northern Fleet, a Baltic Fleet, a Pacific Fleet and a Black Sea fleet.
The S-400 may be the best air defense system in the world
The S-400 is a massive upgrade to Russia’s successful S-300 surface-to-air missile system. While it’s only in limited service at this point, its predecessor currently stands as Russia’s premiere air defense system.
The S-400 has a range of 250 miles, at least twice that of the United States’ MIM-104 Patriot. Three different missiles are used for various ranges, with the fastest going twelve times the speed of sound. The radar can track 100 targets at once.
With this system, even some of the most elite attacking aircraft are at risk.
The S-500 is definitely going to be the best air defense system in the world
PressTV
The S-500 is a more efficient version of the S-400 designed for ICBM interception among other air defense goals. It’ll be derived from the S-400 but will be reduced in dimensions.
The radar systems have been improved from the S-400, and most of the equipment will be derived from the S-300 family. It’s supposed to be a highly mobile system. Again, details are loose, but this could be a serious game-changer.
The most interesting take away: This isn’t designed to defend from a U.S. ballistic missile attack.
As China builds up their ICBM range, this is likely insurance against either a souring of relations between Moscow and Beijing or the spread of Chinese ICBMs to less-predictable countries.
The Iskander-M missile system replaces the SCUD as the go-to tactical ballistic missile
The Iskander-M is a hypersonic single-stage surface-to-surface ballistic missile with an operational range of 250 miles and an accuracy of 5-7 meters. It’s designed for conventional warheads.
The missiles are 24 feet long and weigh four tons. They are designed for theater-level conflicts.
The case in point is the 2008 South Ossetia war against Georgia, where the missile was hugely effective in destroying military targets.
According to Wikileaks releases of emails from Stratfor.com, there are five Iskander missile brigades stationed in Russia.
The Pantsir-S1 is one of the most sophisticated and compact air defense systems in Russia
The Pantsir S-1 is one incredible system. It combines both medium-range Surface-to-air missiles with anti-aircraft artillery and the most sophisticated radar system available in a single compact package.
Produced beginning in 2008, it’s effective against aircraft, helicopters, drones, and cruise missiles. Russia is even installing it on their aircraft carrier.
Pantsir carries twelve missiles, each with an operational range of 12 miles. The main selling point of the Pantisir is the phase-array radar, which has 360 degree coverage amd a detection range of 20 miles. It can track 20 targets simultaneously.
Russian skies are safe from incoming threats.
Topol is Russia’s first new ICBM since the Soviet breakup
Produced beginning in 1994, the Topol-M Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) packs a single 800 kiloton warhead and is propelled by a three-stage solid propellant. It has an operational range of 6,800 miles and travels at 22 times the speed of sound.
The Topol can be launched from either a reinforced missile silo or a transporter.
Even more, the Topol is being developed to sustain Multiple Re-entry vehicles (MIRV), which would allow multiple warheads to be transported by a singe rocket.
The beleaguered START treaty would have Russia replace their existing MIRV ICBMs with ICBMS with a single warhead. Don’t hold your breath.
.jpg){kind=link}
