With one little sentence declared by Turkish Prime Minister Binali Yildirim, there is now the potential to change many prime players and sides in the Syrian ongoing crisis/war. While on his first visit to Russia, Yildrim was quoted yesterday as saying both countries “understand each other better than before.” Can the end of this arab bloodshed be on the horizon? As we know, Turkey has been a staunch critic of Assad since the start of the uprising in Syria.
Turkey and Russia have also been backing opposing sides in the Syrian conflict for a long time. Ankara has been combating ISIS and Syrian Kurdish forces while Russia has backed the Syrian regime dating back to even Assad’s father, well over 50 years ago. Turkey and Mother Russia have not exactly been the “best of friends” especially after the downing of a Russian Su – 24 bomber last year.
So why is it that the two countries getting closer together? Could it be that Turkey wants to collaborate with Putin instead of Donald? More than likely, Turkey is vying for leverage with NATO and its own role in the coalition against ISIS and a post liberated Mosul. By visiting Russia now before Donald Trump takes over, Turkey is hoping to gain bargaining power in the unfolding Middle East. This is especially important as it has become clear that it was Turkey’s hand behind the creation and growth of ISIS. This is a fact that Donald Trump knows all too well.
As Trump gets ready to put strength behind Israel as its most trusted ally in the region, Islamist Erdogan and the Turkish government is struggling to find meaning in a reion soon to be carved up by the USA and Russia.
Most Africa observers believe Donald Trump will ignore the continent or at the most put the relationships Presidents Obama and Bush had built there on the back burner. While it’s true Trump does not see Africa as the central plank to his foreign policy, his black and white views of the world in regards to radical Islam may prove to be a perfect lens on how he will deal with the African continent.
Right now, the main way the USA fights radical Islam on the African continent is through Africom. Africom, is one of six of the US Defence Department’s “geographic combatant commands and is responsible to the Secretary of Defense for military relations with African nations.” Given the fact that Africom works with a number undesirable leaders, the main one being President Buhari of Nigeria, Trump may decide to tweak these relationships due to leaders like Buhari who are compromised by radical Islamic ties.
Israel as a Key Player
As Israel makes serious inroads into both West and East Africa in regards to trade and security, they are the ideal partner in building a force for tackling radical Islam. Israel already has deep security relationships with Kenya, Ethiopia, Rwanda, Uganda, South Sudan as well as Ghana and now Togo. With these deepening ties, the Trump administration would be wise to connect Africom to Israel’s presence in these areas.
Biafra Will Be The Test for Trump
If Trump is serious about fighting radical Islam then the first thing he needs to do in Africa is to break direct relations with the Buhari government in Nigeria. Buhari is a known smypathizer of radical Islam and supports the spread of Sharia Law south of the Sahara. Furthermore, Biafra, the region made up of a unique Judeo-Christian culture dominated by the Igbo tribe was forcibly fused together by the British with the Yaruba and the Muslim Hausa in the North to form Nigeria in 1914.
Map of Biafra
Biafra has been continuously oppressed by their Muslim rulers for not following Sharia. Buhari utilized his friendship with Obama to gain powerful weapons and instead of using them to destroy ISIS affiliated groups he has turned his guns on the south through proxies like the Muslim Fulani herdsman. Thousands of Igbo have been put into jail, including IPOB leader Nnmadi Kanu for treason.
Trump can roll back radical Islam by using Israeli networking, relationships, and weapons to help liberate Biafra from radical Islam and create the first Judeo-Christian republic in West Africa.
In the waning days of Obama’s presidency, his grand strategy to wipe out ISIS by taking Mosul has gone from an ingenious weaving of various coalition members fighting under American leadership to a failed slog as the advance of Iraqi forces grinds to a halt. The battle turned after Iraqi forces entered the Golgali neighborhood. They have been stuck there fighting a far more ferocious enemy than they imagined. Each day they take to advance mere inches the American backed Iraqi units’ morale lowers, giving ISIS an increasing edge in Mosul. Before Golgali, experts gave ISIS weeks, but now it looks like months if not more.
Compounding the strategy is the fact Abu Bakr Baghdadi, the self appointed caliph of ISIS is no longer there. Despite his absence he continues to inspire all of ISIS through the airwaves. One mission for coalition forces was to take the Nouree Al Kaber mosque early on. This is the mosque where Baghdadi proclaimed himself the leader of the caliphate 30 months ago. Coalition forces still have a long way to go in getting close to the mosque, a destination that would crush the morale of ISIS if Iraqi troops succeeded in reaching it.
Source: Google Maps
With the multi ethnic coalition collapsing and the Iraqi forces unable to break ISIS, Obama’s waning days in office are a nightmare. Passing off ISIS to Trump is admitting failure, but with weeks to go it has become clear that Trump and Putin will attempt to work together to destroy ISIS in both Al-Raqqa and Mosul. Then again, ISIS may show to be just resilient to the new administration as they have been with Obama.
Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison is a front-runner for chairman of the Democratic National Committee. If you are following the ongoing developments in Rep. Keith Ellison‘s bid to become the next chair of the DNC, you may be interested in some primary source information from Wikileak’s Cablegate.
“…. On April 5, U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Rep. Tom Lantos (D-California), Rep. Henry Waxman (D-California), Rep. Nick Rahall (D-West Virginia), Rep. Louise McIntosh Saughter (D-New York), Rep. Dave Hobson (R-Ohio), and Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minnesota) met with Majlis Al-Shura (Consultative Council) Chairman Sheikh Dr. Salih bin Humaid, Saudi Ambassador to the U.S. Adel Al-Jubeir, and eleven other Shura Council members. Humaid … is also the imam of the Grand Mosque in Mecca …
… Before entering the meeting room, the U.S. delegation was greeted by the 11 Council members who participated in the main meeting. At one point during the meeting, Speaker Pelosi noted that when Congressman Ellison took the oath of office in January 2007, he did so on a Qur’an originally owned by President Jefferson. She pointed out that she told King Abdullah that Jefferson studied Arabic after he left the White House and that U.S. interest in Islam is at least 200 years old. (COMMENT: The Majlis members were visibly and audibly impressed. END COMMENT.) …
…. Shura Council representative Al-Hilwa conveyed his optimism regarding the Arab Peace Initiative, asking for USG support and initiative in pushing it forward. He noted that the Arab Quartet (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, and Jordan) supports it and requested that the international Quartet do the same. Al-Hilwa emphasized the necessity for Israel to accept the initiative, hoping that the U.S. Congress would press the Israelis to do so. Congressman Lantos said he was deeply impressed with the King’s proposal for a comprehensive settlement of the Arab-Israeli dispute, emphasizing his importance as a regional leader, as well as vis-a-vis the region’s religious hierarchy. Congressman Lantos stressed that governments such as Egypt and Jordan that have relations with Israel would be useful in this process, adding that it is also important to involve United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon because he enjoys global respect and can help move the proposal forward. He warned that settling this dispute will not happen overnight and will require a great deal of give and take, consultation, and negotiation.
… Council member Fadhel said that everyone is very worried about military developments in the region, especially as they relate to nuclear weapons. He said people are especially worried about Israeli nuclear weapons that are ready for use, saying that the populace wants the region, including Iran, clear and free of nuclear weapons. However, he doubted that this would happen unless the Arab-Israeli conflict is resolved comprehensively and justly. He emphasized that most countries in the region do not accept that Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons is ignored while Iran is sanctioned.
… Noting that there are a number of initiatives in Congress to address energy needs, Speaker Pelosi emphasized that for environmental, energy, economic, and security reasons, the U.S. must increase its energy independence and reduce its dependence on oil. She pointed out that there is not an endless supply of oil and that the U.S. must prepare for the future, adding that the U.S. must also stop global warming. However, she welcomed further discussion, saying that the issue is important to all countries.”
MAJLIS EAGER TO ENGAGE WITH CONGRESS; REQUESTS OFFICIAL INVITATIONS (2007 August 8)
“… As Chair of the K.S.A.- U.S.A. Friendship Committee, Al-Aiban announced that he is developing a series of exchange visits to the U.S. Congress because there is a “need for greater contacts between Congress and the Majlis.” He also confided that Minnesota Representative Keith Ellison, who accompanied Speaker Pelosi in April 2007, may be invited to take part in the annual Hajj. Citing the current NOPEC legislation (ref A), Al-Aiban said it is vital to also bring “non-friends” to Saudi Arabia. In closing, Al-Aiban shared that he and a small delegation will be traveling to the U.S. in early October to prepare logistics for the planned visit of Majlis President Sheikh Dr. Salih bin Humaid in late 2007. Referring to House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s verbal invitation in April 2007 (ref B) for Humaid to visit Congress, Al-Aiban requested official invitations from Speaker Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in order to follow up on that invitation.”
CODEL TIERNEY’S MEETING WITH PRESIDENT MUSHARRAF (2008 March 28)
“… Codel Tierney (Representatives John Tierney, Keith Ellison, Jim Moran, Betty McCollum, Maurice Hinchey, and Barbara Cubin), accompanied by Charge and Polcouns met March 27 with President Pervez Musharraf. Also attending were General Shaufkat and MFA Additional Secretary for Americas Attiyah Mahmood.”
ODEL TIERNEY MEETS WITH AHSAN IQBAL, PML-N INFORMATION SECRETARY (2008 April 4)
“… Codel Tierney (Representatives John Tierney, Keith Ellison, Jim Moran, Betty McCollum, Maurice Hinchey, and Barbara Cubin), accompanied by Polcouns, met March 27 with Ahsan Iqbal, the newly elected National Assembly member and former Chief Coordinator and Information Secretary for the Pakistan Muslim League – Nawaz (PML-N), and congratulated him on his new position within the National Assembly.
… Representative Tierney asked whether the new government would give the international community access to A.Q. Khan, the mastermind behind Pakistan’s nuclear capability development. Iqbal quickly pointed out that no political party within Pakistan would ‘give him over.’ However, both the PML-N and the PPP are committed to nuclear non-proliferation. In addition, during his term as Prime Minister, Nawaz Sharif rejected the idea of selling the nuclear technology capabilities to other countries, as he was pressured to do. Iqbal was quick to note that had the world’s super powers created a legitimate means of nuclear technology transfer, Pakistan would not have had to create their program using back channels. Iqbal believed that Pakistan was willing to work with the US on creating such a legitimate system of technology transfer for other interested countries.”
US-ISLAMIC WORLD FORUM: IMPACT COMES ON THE MARGINS (2009 February 25)
“… Congressman Keith Ellison (DFL-MN) spoke on a panel devoted to the Administration’s approach to the Muslim world …
… On the margins of the Forum, Ellison appeared on Al Jazeera’s Arabic channel as the “mid-day guest,” and was also interviewed by Turkish national television and Egypt’s Al Hayat TV … Ellison also granted an interview to Qatari Arabic daily ‘Al Watan’ …
… Ellison spoke to the dean, faculty and students at Qatar University’s Sharia College and responded to questions about religious freedom and the lives of ordinary Muslims in the United States. The Congressman also spoke to a gathering of young Qatari men organized by the General Youth Authority.”
CODEL BAIRD DISCUSSES GAZA, INTERFAITH DIALOGUE, AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY IN AMMA (2009 March 3)
“… During a February 17-18 visit to Amman, Congressmen Brian Baird and Keith Ellison (both members of the Friends of Jordan Caucus) took the pulse of Jordanian feelings on Gaza …
… During a reception hosted by UNRWA Commissioner-General Karen Abu Zayd, Baird and Ellison announced their intention to ‘bear witness’ to the impact of Israel’s operations in Gaza by traveling there.
… During a phone call with Prince Ghazi, the King’s primary advisor on religious issues, Baird and Ellison spoke about possibilities for advancing interfaith dialogue under the “Common Word” initiative, which identifies commonalities in the Muslim and Christian scriptures. Ghazi flagged an upcoming Georgetown University conference on the subject and urged the Codel to write a letter to President Obama, asking him to attend. Ghazi also outlined his attempts to formulate a UN resolution declaring a World Interfaith Week — a cause he hopes to formally launch at the Georgetown conference. Ghazi plans to accompany the King on a sought-after visit to meet President Obama and hopes to lobby for the President to attend the conference on the side.
… Baird voiced concerns that Judaism was not a part of the Common Word initiative, adding that the cause would be stronger if the common beliefs of three rather than two religions were included. Ghazi responded that Judaism was left out of Common Word due to political sensitivities among Muslims, saying, ‘It’s a tough sell on my side.’”
“After a months-long review by a U.S. House ethics panel, Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., has disclosed the amount of his privately-paid trip to Mecca in December.
The trip, paid for by the Muslim American Society of Minnesota, cost $13,350, Ellison said Thursday.
The two-week trip to Saudi Arabia, which Ellison described as a personal religious pilgrimage, or Hajj, prompted little discussion until June when Ellison filed financial travel reports that failed to disclose the amount the Muslim group had paid for his travel.
In releasing the amount on Thursday, Ellison held to his previous assertion that he was following the instructions of the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, commonly known as the ethics committee.
‘I never had a moral objection to giving the number out,’ said Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress. ‘But the rules said I didn’t have to, so I didn’t. Now I am.’”
“As Chair of the K.S.A.– U.S.A. Friendship Committee, Al-Aiban announced that he is developing a series of exchange visits to the U.S. Congress because there is a ‘need for greater contacts between Congress and the Majlis.’ He also confided that Minnesota Representative Keith Ellison, who accompanied Speaker Pelosi in April 2007, may be invited to take part in the annual Hajj. Citing the current NOPEC legislation (ref A), Al-Aiban said it is vital to also bring ‘non-friends’ to Saudi Arabia. In closing, Al-Aiban shared that he and a small delegation will be traveling to the U.S. in early October to prepare logistics for the planned visit of Majlis President Sheikh Dr. Salih bin Humaid in late 2007. Referring to House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s verbal invitation in April 2007 (ref B) for Humaid to visit Congress, Al-Aiban requested official invitations from Speaker Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in order to follow up on that invitation.”
If the House ethics panel did not, in fact, have this information for context during their review, it is this author’s opinion that members of the panel should reopen the investigation to ensure that all relevant background information is considered. It appears that the House ethics panel’s initial review was focused on whether the Rep. Ellison’s travel expenses were reported according to procedure insofar as the nature of private or public business conducted during the trip. In light of all of the background context revealed in the diplomatic cables, especially the information regarding Al-Aiban’s statement that revealed it was Majlis Al-Shura’s intention to bring Rep. Ellison over for Hajj, there are other questions that arise as to procedure — for instance, about the source of the funding for the travel and whether it was channeled or arranged by a foreign government.
The news out of Syria this week is, as usual, complex—and seemingly contradictory.
On the one hand, the Russian-Syrian-Iranian-Hizballah alliance appeared to have overcome rebel resistance in Aleppo—a major turning point that would shift the war’s momentum in the alliance’s favor.
On the other hand, Arab and other media reported that on Wednesday the Israeli air force struck a Syrian weapons depot west of Damascus and a weapons convoy headed for Hizballah in Lebanon.
As of Thursday evening there had been no retaliation against Israel, and Israeli analysts generally saw a retaliation as unlikely.
Media outside of Israel have, of course, often reported in the past on Israeli airstrikes—usually against Hizballah-bound weaponry—in Syria.
Israel’s policy has been to keep mum, neither denying nor confirming the reports. Last April, though, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu acknowledged that Israel had carried out “dozens” of strikes in Syria against “game-changing weaponry” for Hizballah.
It’s no secret that, since the 2006 war between Israel and Hizballah in Lebanon, Hizballah has massively rearmed and now harbors tens of thousands of missiles. But Israel regards some kinds of weapons—precision rockets, advanced antiship and antiaircraft systems—as out of bounds for the terror group.
What has changed in the Syrian arena, though, is that late last year Russia deployed its powerful S-400 radar and antiaircraft system there. It covers Syria, Lebanon, and much of Israel and can track Israel’s northern airspace.
Since then there have been far fewer reported Israeli airstrikes in Syria. In one of them, last September, the outcome seemed ominous when Syria—not a military match for Israel by itself, but backed by Russia and Iran—fired missiles at two Israeli aircraft.
Why, then, the Israeli strike this week? Why no military response this time?
One conjecture: the weapons Israel struck in the Syrian depot and in the convoy would have been particularly unacceptable weapons in Hizballah’s hands.
Another conjecture: the much-touted Israeli-Russian coordination, whereby Netanyahu and Russian president Vladimir Putin are said to have worked out arrangements to avoid clashes, is still operative.
Other possible mitigating factors are that Israel reportedly hit the targets from Lebanese, not Syrian, airspace, and that no Syrian or Hizballah fighters appear to have been killed.
The larger question: what happens if Syria’s Assad and his backers have indeed turned the tide and will be looking to keep extending their control over Syrian territory?
Of interest here are remarks to the Algemeiner website by Yossi Kuperwasser, who has held major positions in Israel’s Military Intelligence.
Kuperwasser, as the site paraphrases it, says that
Iran is stepping up the speed at which it is arming its proxies in the region due to its fear that after Donald Trump assumes the US presidency in January, its room to maneuver in Syria will be greatly hampered….
And regarding Israel and Russia, in Kuperwasser’s own words:
There is a mutual understanding of each other’s interests. Though Russia and Iran are backing Hezbollah combat rebel forces fighting against the Assad regime, Russia understands that Israel cannot allow weapons from Hezbollah in Syria to be moved to Lebanon, where they will be aimed at the Jewish state.
How long can this relatively tolerable—for Israel—situation continue?
Indications are that its days may be numbered. Even if Putin’s strategic goals are not identical to those of his allies—he is clearly not a Shiite ideologue like the Iranians and Hizballah or a Shiite-aligned Arab like Assad—his steps have been increasingly brazen.
Along with the transfer of major weapon systems to Syria, and an aircraft carrier to its coast, they include major weapons sales to Iran, joint provision with Iran of weapons to Iran’s Houthi proxies in Yemen, and reports of Russian aid to Iranian-backed Shiite militias in Iraq.
As Kuperwasser puts it, Israel’s most serious concern is “Iran’s increasing territorial contiguity—crossing Iraq, Syria and Lebanon.”
For the incoming Trump administration, stemming this tide should be an urgent priority. Whatever Putin’s real motive, he is helping create a situation of unacceptable danger to Israel and a Middle East bifurcated between Shiite and Sunni blocs—a recipe for ongoing war and explosive instability.
