Russia Has Won the Proxy War in Syria



‘Russia Has Won the Proxy War in Syria’: The Deal With US Fulfills Moscow’s Mission

…from Sputnik, Moscow

Can Russian and Syrian air power crush the rebel counter attacks?
Can Russian and Syrian air power crush the rebel counter attacks?

[ Editor’s Note: I chose this article today for mixed reasons. The Woodrow Wilson Center is a very “power friendly” entity inside the DC beltway. On the one hand, it seems they are being critical of US policy by claiming it has failed, but the emphasis on the joint victory to Russia and Iran is a tip off that it is a propaganda piece.

Why? Part of that stems from the “why now” first question, with the answer being to tag Obama and the Democrats with the loss at this key moment in the presidential campaign.

Although this was published yesterday we can see it is a bit outdated, because Kerry is certainly not following through with the coordination on the airstrikes with Russia, due to the Aleppo battle reaching a tipping point. That has become even more of a trump card, as we are now several days into both sides claiming progress in that battle, with no real confirmation.

Mr. “unconfirmed source” has been overused during the last few days. And then we have Syria being left out of the victory tour psyops piece below, a clear hint that these sources were assigned to pedal this spin at this point. Only someone under control of the NeoCon war-meisters would have been forbidden to give any credit to Assad’s government and the Syrian army for “the victory”, which has clearly been a group effort by Syria and its allies.

And last, has anyone noticed that the US and Western media reports never mention Hezbollah people anymore, when it was an often-used boogeyman terrorist group? Someone powerful would have had to put the word out to corporate media to banish them from any mention, most likely because they wanted the focus on Russia and Iran as “the enemy”.

We still cannot confirm the status of the SE Aleppo artillery base and its mentioned large ammunition stockpiles. Even if the jihadis are inside part of the base, securing and then transporting any captured stocks would be more than difficult, as all available Damascus and Russian air power would descend upon them.

That said, I doubt that Damascus would want to blow it up, as it is a strategic ammo reserve for the north, and there could be much fighting still ahead. We should have a clearer picture over the next few days… Jim W. Dean ]


It is Syria that has been "bogged down" in the war, not Russia, Iran, or the US
It is Syria that has been “bogged down” in the war, not Russia, Iran, or the US

– First published  …  August 07,  2016

Commenting on the recent developments in the Syrian conflict and the agreement between Russia and the US on the coordination of bombing missions in the country, many media sources now agree that Moscow has the upper hand in the conflict and its agreement with the US will grant it and its ally Iran the final victory.

“Russia has won the proxy war, at least for now,” Michael Kofman, a fellow at the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington told the New York Times.

Are the "end times" near  for Daesh in Syria, or is this just a setback for them?
Are the “end times” near for Daesh in Syria, or is this just a setback for them?

The statement refers to the recently announced agreement between Russia and the US on a plan to share intelligence and coordinate airstrikes against the Islamic State and other militant groups in Syria.

Earlier in July, US officials put forward a proposal that would see Russian and US air forces conduct joint strikes against Daesh and Al-Nusra Front, an Al-Qaeda branch in Syria.

While on his visit to Moscow, US Secretary of State John Kerry proposed the US share intelligence and targeting data with Russia and coordinate bombing missions. US and Russian air forces would maintain their separate headquarters but would share a joint command center in Amman, Jordan.

Previously, the two nations coordinated air operations only to maintain the safety of each other’s aircraft, not in terms of targeting or intelligence on locations of rebel positions. US Secretary of State John Kerry, speaking in Laos last week, said he hoped to be able to announce the details of a US-Russian understanding in the first week of August.

Jeffrey White, a former Defense Intelligence Agency officer who now studies Syria at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, told the New York Times that.

“The Russians had built a capable intelligence network in Syria, giving them a better understanding of the terrain and location of rebel forces…That has allowed Russian troops to call in precision airstrikes, making them more effective against the rebels.”

Thus, the newspaper says, President Putin “has achieved many of his larger goals — to prop up Mr. Assad’s government, retain access to the longtime Russian naval base on the Mediterranean Sea and use Syria as a proving ground for the most advanced Russian military technology.”


The New York Times sounds somewhat surprised that the Russian leader has done it “without becoming caught in a quagmire that some — including President Obama — had predicted he would.” This view is echoed by Fabrice Balanche, an expert in the Middle East, who also forecasts that the agreement between the US and Russia could signal a victory for Moscow and Tehran in Syria.

In his article for the French newspaper Le Figaro he suggests that ”the summer of 2016 might become a moment of truth in Syria, not the ultimate end of the fighting on the ground, but a true victory for Russia and Iran.” His comment also refers to the military cooperation agreement between Russia and the US in Syria.

The expert suggests that it came as the result of the US’ “disillusion with the crisis that never ends, the success of the Russian strategy in Syria and the need to clear up the field for Hilary Clinton.”

“Indeed, a major jihadist attack in the United States right ahead of the presidential election scheduled for November 6, would have most likely pushed voters to Donald Trump,” he suggests.

“The American public believes that the main danger is the radical Islamists and not the regime of Bashar al-Assad. Therefore, the aim of the US government should be a hard and unambiguous fight against al-Qaeda and the Islamic State (Daesh).”

It seems that this is also the opinion of Barack Obama, much to the dismay of advocates of “regime change,” he finally notes.



We See The World From All Sides and Want YOU To Be Fully Informed
In fact, intentional disinformation is a disgraceful scourge in media today. So to assuage any possible errant incorrect information posted herein, we strongly encourage you to seek corroboration from other non-VT sources before forming an educated opinion.

About VT - Policies & Disclosures - Comment Policy
Due to the nature of uncensored content posted by VT's fully independent international writers, VT cannot guarantee absolute validity. All content is owned by the author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images are the full responsibility of the article author and NOT VT.

Comments are closed.