by Ghassan Kadi for the Saker blog
In his article (http://thesaker.is/listening-to-russian-experts-short-report-about-the-mood-on-russian-prime-time-tv/), The Saker relayed the mood of Russian experts regarding the recent Western acts of brazen intimidations and unsubstantiated allegations against Russia.
According to this analysis, some Russians seem to see that war with America, even a full-scale war, is inevitable.
And just a few weeks ago, President Putin made his historic 1st of March speech in which he demonstrated Russia’s readiness to defend herself with state-of-the-art hypersonic weapons, the likes of which America is perhaps decades away from being able to develop.
March 2018 has indeed been a tumultuous month, and in my article (http://thesaker.is/how-far-can-the-americans-be-pushed/) I presented my personal take on what constitutes for America a national and existential threat.
Yet, even with Putin’s powerful speech, Western powers continue to flex their muscles and continue to resort to fabrications that serve their interests. None has been stronger recently than the poisoning of Skripal and the alleged Russian involvement plus the alleged chemical attack on East Ghouta by the Syrian army.
For the benefit of readers who are not aware of certain facts, none of the above allegations have any evidence to support them. Furthermore, neither Russia nor Syria have anything to gain from either action had they been responsible.
As usual, just as in the case of previous alleged chemical attacks in Syria, America huffs and puffs and makes threats of military action.
But the current huffing and puffing is the first of its kind since Putin’s 1st of March speech. Does this make it any different from other threats to attack Syria? It does indeed. To begin with, and unlike what happened back in September 2013 after the first alleged chemical attack and American threats, this time, Russia is issuing stern warnings against any foolish American intervention
One thing that the Russian experts mentioned above agree to is that there is no point in reasoning with the West, because the West is intent to lie and deceive. They also agree that there is little left that America can do to change the course of events in Syria.
So what are the Western objectives of the escalations in Syria? It is hard to make any rational conclusion, because the West is acting quite irrationally, but these are the main possible scenarios that are probably on the table of Western policy makers:
- Test Russia’s resolve and military capability. Some Western lawmakers expressed doubt after Putin’s speech and reiterated that he was bluffing.
- Prolong the period of chaos in the hope that time brings about a miracle that favours Western interests.
- The West can well be bluffing and wants to keep Syria and Russia on their toes.
- The West can be indeed short-sighted and stupid enough to drag itself into a serious direct military confrontation with Russia.
Not knowing what America seeks in its foolish actions, the onus is on Russia to be both prepared and wise, but this is not an easy ask and task.
Russia’s response no doubt is contingent upon her military prowess which is a well-kept secret that none of us can claim to be privy to. But the 1st of March speech given by Putin would not have been made if Russia was not prepared militarily. For some Western sceptics to think that Putin was bluffing is not surprising, because they judge others by their own ethos. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-02/is-vladimir-putin-bluffing-on-nuclear-weapons/9502240 But this is not to say that the Putin speech is to be taken literally as an exact description of Russia’s military capabilities; especially in terms of advanced weapons that give her the upper hand. So the truth is that we don’t know what Russia has over and above what Putin revealed in his historic speech.
So what are Russia’s options really?
For Russia to allow herself to be dragged into a large-scale confrontation with America in the Mediterranean would be very unwise. Not only this can lead to a wider full-on confrontation between the two superpowers, but this will also give America a bigger justification to escalate its presence in Syria and attack on Syrian targets.
Yet, for Russia to sit idle if America were to attack Syrian targets will only reflect a sign of weakness and will also encourage America to further escalate.
Russia is certainly in a damned-if-you-do-and-damned-if-you-don’t situation in that regard, bcause she is dealing with a mindless psychopathic war machine with decades long history of creating mayhem and chaos.
Russia’s response must be measured, because even if Russia is able to achieve local victory over America in Syria, this victory risks further escalations elsewhere. It would far wiser for Russia therefore to serve America with a milder, yet powerful and humiliating defeat, instead.
The first rational line of action for Russia should be to intercept American missiles; without targeting their launch pads.
If America finds that Russia’s defence systems are turning their Tomahawks merely into fireworks that light up the skies, they may then pull back humiliated. If they don’t pull back and continue to escalate, Russia can respond accordingly in a simultaneous, graduating manner. Russia could even strategically escalate when appropriate with actions such as hitting virtual targets in the Mediterranean, just a few hundred meters away from US Navy ships, signalling a message that their naval vessels are defenceless sitting ducks. If this is still not enough to show America who has the upper hand, Russia may use her highly controversial electronic jamming weapons in order to disable warships, fighter jets and guided missiles.
Under no circumstances should Russia be the first nation to draw blood with America, but should America opt to attack Russian forces in Syria, Russia will have all the right to self-defend and return fire with fire that targets its origins.
The measured response that Russia ought to adopt must be extremely humiliating for America, and one that cannot be hidden or sugar-coated by its recipient and its huge media army. The ultimate humiliation would be in electronically disabling an American naval ship and towing it into the Russian naval base in Tartous in Syria. In saying this, I do not profess to know if this is possible, but I am only using this example to elaborate what can be seen as ultimate humiliation.
The bottom line here is that Western thuggery and bullishness must be stopped. Russia must use what is within her power to juggle a wise and decisive response to Western foolhardiness. To this effect, Russia is not standing alone this time. During his visits to Russia in early April, the Chinese defence chief has said that his visit aims to signal to America that China stands with Russia. He specifically named America. This is an unprecedented endorsement from America’s main economic rival and rising super power.
Furthermore, China has recently warned the West against taking action in Syria in response to the alleged chemical weapons pretext before a proper investigation is done.
Any whichever way one looks at it, the bottom line is this. The West is losing both its grip and marbles. As a result, it has lost both its integrity and rationality. In the absence of a major conflict, as every last opportunity to conjure up pretexts for attacking Syria fades, the West grows increasingly desperate, knowing time is no longer on its side. And yet, it feels obligated to do something to save face and save the situation. On the other hand, the Eurasian alliance knows that time is on its side. It does not need a military confrontation to regain any grip of influence it has lost. What it needs is more peace time for it to develop itself further and gain more edge. We often speak of the Silk Road project, but it is in fact a network of roads that China intends to build in order to connect itself with Europe and the Middle East, and this will not only serve its business interests, but also its standing as a world power. And, as this vast untraveled region of the world suddenly has major highways running through it, the whole area from as far as Eastern China to Azerbaijan, Southern Russia, possibly Georgia and Armenia, will open up to the rest of the world, and their economies will boom, including their tourism sectors. So as the West is hell-bent on destruction and creating havoc, the Eurasian alliance is working hard on building bridges.
The irony here is that the West does not have a clear and potentially winning plan if it were to take the military option in Syria. This is why Russia, joined by China, must find a way to serve the West with the right and measured blow that will kick the West with a painful blow in the guts instead of giving it a total knockout.