Obama proposes new military partnership with Russia in Syria

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio

iHeart.SmythRadio.com

Facebook.com/SmythRadio

Smoke rises from a warplane bomb that dropped in Aleppo, Syria, on June 4. (Uncredited/Civil Defense Directorate in Liberated Province of Aleppo via Associated Press)

By Josh Rogin June 30 at 7:01 AM 

The Obama administration has proposed a new agreement on Syria to the Russian government that would deepen military cooperation between the two countries against some terrorists in exchange for Russia getting the Assad regime to stop bombing U.S.-supported rebels.

The United States transmitted the text of the proposed agreement to the Russian government on Monday after weeks of negotiations and internal Obama administration deliberations, an administration official told me. The crux of the deal is a U.S. promise to join forces with the Russian air force to share targeting and coordinate an expanded bombing campaign against Jabhat al-Nusra, al-Qaeda’s branch in Syria, which is primarily fighting the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad

Under the proposal, which was personally approved by President Obama and heavily supported by Secretary of State John F. Kerry, the American and Russian militaries would cooperate at an unprecedented level, something the Russians have sought for a long time.

In exchange, the Russians would agree to pressure the Assad regime to stop bombing certain Syrian rebel groups the United States does not consider terrorists. The United States would not give Russia the exact locations of these groups, under the proposal, but would specify geographic zones that would be safe from the Assad regime’s aerial assaults.

Putin: Russia doesn't want a new Cold War

 

Play Video0:55

During a question and answer session at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, President Vladimir Putin said Russia did not want a new Cold war with the West and did not like to think it was slipping into one. (Reuters)

Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter was opposed to this plan, officials said, but was ultimately compelled to go along with the president’s decision. For many inside and outside the administration who are frustrated with the White House’s decision-making on Syria, the new plan is fatally flawed for several reasons.

“One big flaw is that it’s clear that the Russians have no intent to put heavy pressure on Assad,” said former U.S. ambassador to Syria Robert Ford. “And in those instances when the Russians have put pressure on, they’ve gotten minimal results from the Syrians.”

There’s not enough reliable intelligence to distinguish Jabhat al-Nusra targets from the other rebel groups they often live near, Ford said. And even if the Syrians agreed not to bomb certain zones, there would be no way to stop Jabhat al-Nusra and other groups from moving around to adjust. Moreover, increased bombing of Jabhat al-Nusra would be likely to cause collateral damage including civilian deaths, which would only bolster the group’s local support.

“It makes no sense to me,” said Ford. “If they are trying to destroy al-Qaeda in Syria, do they really think bombing them is the way to do it? F-16s do not solve recruitment problems with extremist groups.”

One administration official complained that the plan contains no consequences for the Russians or the Assad regime if they don’t hold up their end of the bargain. Fifty-one U.S. diplomats signed a dissent letter this month calling on the White House to use targeted military force against the Assad regime as a means of increasing the pressure on Assad and giving the U.S. real leverage.

Kerry has been threatening for months that if Assad doesn’t respect the current cease-fire, known as the “cessation of hostilities,” that there was a “Plan B” of increasing arms to the Syrian rebels. But the White House has now scuttled that plan in favor of the proposed Russia deal, which could actually leave the rebels in a far worse position.

Because most Jabhat al-Nusra fighters are fighting Assad, if the plan succeeds, Assad will be in a much better position. Meanwhile, the other Sunni Arab groups that are left fighting Assad will be in a much weaker position, said Andrew Tabler, senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. The strategy could allow Assad to capture Aleppo, which would be a huge victory for his side in the civil war.

“If the U.S. and Russia open up on Jabhat al-Nusra, that changes the dynamics on the ground in Aleppo and Idlib,” he said. “It would definitely benefit the Assad regime and it could potentially benefit the Kurds and ISIS.”

For Russia, the deal is not just about Syria. Russian President Vladimir Putin sees increased military cooperation as an acknowledgment of Russian importance and a way to gradually unwind Russia’s isolation following the Russian military intervention in Ukraine. That’s why Carter was initially opposed to the plan, officials said.

“The Russians have made it very clear that they want military-to-military cooperation with the U.S., not just to fight terrorism, but to improve their world standing,” said Tabler. “It is a way to be welcomed back into the fold.”

State Department spokesman John Kirby declined to comment on the specifics of the proposal but defended its basic principles.

“We have been clear about Russia’s obligations to ensure regime compliance with the cessation of hostilities. We have also been clear about the danger posed by al-Qaeda in Syria to our own national security,” he said. “We are looking at a number of measures to address both of these issues.”

For the White House, the priority in Syria is not solving the Syrian civil war, which most White House officials believe is intractable, or forcing the ouster of Assad. Senior administration officials admit that Russia and Assad are violating the cease-fire and failing to show the will to advance the political process. But the White House has decided not to go back to the plan of increasing pressure on the Assad regime.

“Analytically speaking, the path of military escalation by one side or the other is not likely to lead to a final outcome in Syria,” one senior administration official told me. “It’s essentially a stalemate.”

The White House wants to keep the cease-fire in place for as long as possible, despite the violations, and wants to keep the political process going, despite the lack of progress.

Today's Headlines newsletter

The day's most important stories.

Sign up

“We want to keep the violence as low as possible for as long as possible,” the official said. “What we have to look at is, what is the alternative? And the alternative is either the levels of violence that we saw months ago . . . or we could see the violence get even worse.”

CIA Director John Brennan said Wednesday in remarks at the Council on Foreign Relations that Russia is “trying to crush” anti-Assad forces and that Moscow has not lived up to its commitments regarding the cease-fire or the political process in Syria. Nevertheless, Brennan said, the United States needs to work with Russia.

“There’s going to be no way forward on the political front without active Russian cooperation and genuine Russian interest in moving forward,” he said.

If the price of getting Russia on board with the Syrian political process is to further abandon the Syrian rebels and hand Assad large swaths of territory, it’s a bad deal. It’s an even worse deal if Russia takes the U.S. offer and then doesn’t deliver on its corresponding obligations.

The Obama administration is understandably trying to find some creative way to salvage its Syria policy in its final months. But the proposal that Obama offered Putin will have costs for the U.S. position vis-à-vis Russia as well as for the Syrian crisis long after Obama leaves office

The Panama Papers: ‘Biggest Data Leak In History’ Claims to Expose How the Powerful Hide Their Riches

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio iHeart.SmythRadio.com
Facebook.com/SmythRadio

AFP

by JOHN HAYWARD4 Apr 2016169

The UK Guardian describes the trove of confidential data stolen from Mossack Fonseca, a Panama-based law firm that specializes in administering offshore accounts, as “the biggest data leak in history.”

This refers to both the size of the database given to the Guardian and the BBC – 11.5 million files totaling over 2.6 terabytes in size, covering 200,000 clients of the firm – and its significance. The Panama Papers are touted as blowing the lid off the extremely complex financial arrangements employed by world leaders to conceal their vast wealth, and shelter it from the very tax systems some of Mossack Fonseca’s clients preside over.

The Guardian says the Panama Papers leak is an order of magnitude larger than either the diplomatic cables exposed by WikiLeaks in 2010 or the trove of intelligence documents stolen by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden in 2013, two leaks that indisputably changed the political conversation around the world. Snowden himself chimed in on Twitter to agree that the Panama Papers are the “biggest leak in the history of data journalism.”

Journalists from over 80 countries are said to be analyzing this mountain of data, which was provided by an anonymous source last year.

Among the prominent political leaders with offshore tax havens managed by Mossack Fonseca is Russian president Vladimir Putin, who is portrayed as using his associates to siphon $2 billion from Russian banks into offshore accounts. Putin cronies named in the scheme include his best friend and godfather of his daughter, cellist Sergei Roldugin, and former Olympic ice dancing champion Tatiana Navka, the glamorous wife of Putin spokesman Dmitry Peskov. Everyone involved in helping Putin conceal his fortune in these offshore accounts grew very rich themselves, according to theGuardian.

The UK Daily Mail quotes Peskov denying the Panama Papers revelations, portraying the story as an attack by foreign intelligence services on Putin’s legitimacy “in the context of the coming parliamentary election.”

“Putinophobia has got so hot that a priori nobody can say anything good about Russia, they must say bad things and if there is nothing to say, one must make something up,” Peskov alleged.

The Daily Mail has Navka claiming she does not know anything about the offshore asset company she is listed as the beneficiary of, and implying that her passport, which was found among the company’s papers, might have been stolen and used without her knowledge.

“My wife never had any offshore company and does not have it now, she never opened it and, accordingly, she could not close it down,” declared Peskov, referring to the November 2015 liquidation of the offshore company.

According to the Daily Mail, there appears to be a Russian media blackout on the Panama Papers story in effect, even though it should be a huge story with the potential to shake up the government, because “Russian law forbids senior officials and their families from using foreign financial institutions and offshore vehicles.” Also, the Guardianobserves that Putin has been publicly urging his citizens to bring money from abroad back home to Russia, which makes the discovery that Putin has been shuffling billions through secret offshore tax havens more than a little inconvenient.

NBC News spoke with several Russia experts who thought the scandal was more likely to embarrass Putin than severely damage him, noting that he is meticulous about keeping his own name away from the most incriminating documents. However, Eurasia Group President Ian Bremmer suggested Russia could “respond aggressively” to everyone involved in what it perceives as an attack on its presidency, including billionaire George Soros and his Open Society Foundation, which provided funding for the group of journalists that broke the Panama Papers story.

“I feel fairly confident that the Kremlin will be going after the U.S., Soros, the CIA and this is going to make Russian policy towards the U.S. actually much more sharp and antagonistic,” said Bremmer.

Other national leaders implicated in the scandal include Pakistani prime minister Nawaz Sharif, former Vice President of Iraq Ayad Allawi, Ukraine’s President Petro Poroshenko, Iceland’s Prime Minister Signundur Davio Gunnlaugsson, and one of former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak’s sons, Alaa Mubarak.

Furthermore, according to the Guardian’sreview of the data, six members of the British House of Lords and three former Conservative MPs had offshore assets, as did the families of at least eight current and former members of the Chinese Politburo.  23 of Mossack Fonseca’s clients were under international sanctions, including supporters of the regimes in North Korea, Iran, and Syria.

The Associated Press reports the Panama Papers leak has already caused a firestorm in Australia, where over 800 wealthy citizens are now under investigation by the Australian Taxation Office, in cooperation with the Australian Federal Police, Australian Crime Commission, and Austrac financial intelligence agency.

The Daily Mail observes that some of Mossack Fonseca’s clients appear to be “billionaire husbands” using the firm to “hide their fortunes from the wives they divorce,” including Russian oligarch Dmitri Rybolovlev, aviation tycoon Clive Joy, and late British billionaire Scot Young. In fact, internal emails from employees of the firm have them cracking jokes about how the offshore companies they helped create were used to protect assets “against the unpleasant results of a divorce.”

As just about every story on the Panama Papers concedes, there appears to be nothing illegal about the services Mossack Fonseca performed for its clients.

In a lengthy statement to the Guardian, the firm challenged the accuracy of some stories circulating around the data leak, and noted the leaked documents confirm that the company “routinely denies services to individuals who are compromised,” or who fail to provide the information needed to comply with regulations.

“It is legal and common for companies to establish commercial entities in different jurisdictions for a variety of legitimate reasons, including conducting cross-border mergers and acquisitions, bankruptcies, estate planning, personal safety, restructuring and pooling of investment capital from different jurisdictions in neutral legal and tax regimes that does not benefit or disadvantage any one investor,” Mossack Fonseca wrote.

“Our services are regulated on multiple levels, often by overlapping agencies, and we have a strong compliance record,” the firm continued. “In addition, we have always complied with international protocols… to assure as is reasonably possible, that the companies we incorporate are not being used for tax evasion, money laundering, terrorist finance or other illicit purposes.”

The firm also noted it does not manage its clients’ companies, does not take possession of their money, and does not “have anything to do with any of the direct financial aspects related to operating their businesses.”  

Mossack Fonseca took strong exception to the idea that “the primary function of the services we provide is to facilitate tax avoidance and/or evasion,” and said it was not responsible for the potential “misuse of companies that we incorporate, or the services we provide.”  The firm insisted it would never willingly help individuals associated with rogue regimes to violate international sanctions.

On the other hand, the firm charged that theGuardian was given “unauthorized access to proprietary documents and information taken from our company and have presented and interpreted them out of context,” and reminded the paper that “using information/documentation unlawfully obtained is a crime,” for which they would not hesitate to press charges.

Read More Stories About:

National Security, Russia, Vladimir Putin,Economics, Panama, Hosni Mubarak, tax avoidance, tax evasion, Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, Panama Papers,offshore accounts, ayad allawi

Russia Rearms for a New Era

www.nytimes.com

Russia is reinvesting in its bases in the Arctic: building new ones, expanding old ones and deploying personnel to operate them. Analysts say Russia’s efforts in the Arctic are driven in part by climate change, as the country seeks to exploit and defend maritime trade routes and oil and natural gas resources in areas made more accessible by melting ice.

Russia has made big increases to its military budget, including a jump of nearly $11 billion from 2014 to 2015. According to Moscow, it is making up for years of disinvestment after the collapse of the Soviet Union. But sanctions from the Ukrainian conflict, dropping oil prices and other financial problems have weakened the Russian economy, and analysts expect military spending to slow.

Russia has scheduled mobilizations of more than 100,000 troops, as well as unannounced exercises that move thousands of troops with almost no notice. These efforts serve as combat training for the troops and as a show of military strength to the world. They often involve units that control Russia’s nuclear arsenal, calling attention to the country’s nuclear abilities. NATO has responded by expanding its own exercises.

“The image that Russian official sources convey is that they’re preparing for large-scale interstate war,” said Johan Norberg of the Swedish Defense Research Agency. “This is not about peacekeeping or counterinsurgency.”

Russia has repeatedly entered or skirted the airspace of other countries, including the United States. Since it annexed Crimea in March 2014, the incidents have grown in number and seriousness. In November, Turkey shot down a Russian plane it said entered its airspace. The pilot was killed, as was a marine on a subsequent rescue mission.

Other incursions have been dangerous, like a near collision in March 2014between a commercial plane carrying 132 passengers and a Russian reconnaissance plane that did not transmit its position.

“Putin is trying to provoke the United States and NATO into military action and create the appearance that they are posing a threat to Russia, in order to bolster his own popularity,” said Kimberly Marten, a professor at Barnard College and director of the United States-Russia Relations program at Columbia University’s Harriman Institute.

In several regions, Russia has exerted its military authority, rattled its rivals, and seeded instability to preserve its influence.

Russia’s role in the Syrian war escalated in September 2015 when it started airstrikes to support the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad. Most of Russia’s airstrikes have been in rebel-held territory, rather than areas controlled by the Islamic State. Amnesty International has accused Russia of using cluster munitions and unguided bombs that it says have killed hundreds of Syrian civilians.

In early 2014, Russia sent special forces troops into Crimea, when Ukraine’s pro-Moscow president was ousted. Crimea then joined Russia in a referendum that Ukraine and Western leaders consider illegal. Later that year, Ukrainian forces in eastern Ukraine fought Russia-backed separatists. A cease-fire agreement in February 2015 slowed the fighting, but clashes continue.

Russia won a war with Georgia in 2008, driving Georgian forces away from the separatist region of South Ossetia. The Kremlin asserts that it is protecting the interests of ethnic Russians in those areas.

The country is buying, updating and developing its military equipment, with the intent to modernize 70 percent of its military by 2020.

“This is Russia catching up on where the West has gotten itself technologically,” said Nick de Larrinaga at IHS Jane’s.

COMMENTS

Under Vladimir Putin, Josef Stalin’s Popularity on the Rise in Russia

Getty Images

by MARY CHASTAIN22 Dec 201596

Under leader Vladimir Putin, Soviet dictator Josef Stalin, who purged between 20 and 60 million of his own people, has become increasingly popular in Russia.

The Russian Communist Party celebrated Stalin’s birthday on Monday at Moscow’s Red Square. Gennady Zyuganov, head of the party, gushed over Stalin to the crowd.

”Today, the experience and courage of Stalin, his genius and talent, should nourish all government officials who truly desire Russia to be kind, happy, and truly sovereign,” raved Zyuganov.

Zyuganov did not mention Stalin’s atrocious history and war crimes. Instead, he praised the mass murderer for leading “the Soviet Union to victory in World War II and stood up to the West during the Cold War.”

“By reinstating and continuing the best Russian imperial practices, following the war he created the most powerful block,” he continued. “A block of Slavic governments and their friends that held NATO at bay, which the entire world feared.”

The Communist Party in Penza declared2016 as “the year of Stalin” and will conduct many events to honor the dictator. Local party chief Georgi Kamenev declared events at the local Stalin Centre will “counter the falsehoods and attacks on Stalin’s reputation and legacy with facts and the truth.”

Kremlin propaganda outlet reported the “long-awaited cultural center” opened on Monday.

“Time itself defines the actual heroes of today,” declared Kamenev. “The image of Stalin is becoming more and more popular, first as a person, but as a simple man too. He was very modest, even though he was the head of a huge country.”

The so-called Luhansk People’s Republic in east Ukraine, a breakaway region, unveileda statue of Stalin this month. Luhansk is one of the areas controlled by pro-Russian rebels and Russian soldiers since March 2014. After Parliament ousted Russian-backed President Viktor Yanukovych, east Ukraine declared itself independent from Kiev. The area’s leaders placed the statue at the offices of the Union of Communists of the Luhansk Oblast.

“At the present time the ideology, symbol, personality of Stalin is important not only for the Luhansk [O]blast, but for the entire world since once again Nazism is on the rise, and for victory over it we need the harsh, strong hand of the leader,” claimed local communist Oleg Popov. “Stalin should serve as an example of creation and restoration against the destruction reigning in Ukraine.”

According to an April poll by the Levada Center, the enormous economic progress under Soviet Union dictator Josef Stalinjustified all the “sacrifices” made by Russians, including the genocide of his own people.

The independent center polled the same question two years ago, but only 25 percent agreed. The latest poll is up to 45 percent.

“[Stalin is being rehabilitated because] the current Russian authorities and [President Vladimir] Putin in particular seek the legitimization and justification of their actions by resorting to the past. It gives them a certain endorsement,” explainedAlexei Levinson, the head of the Levada Center’s social and cultural studies department. “There are two consequences of that: On the one hand, the state might triumph in the further consolidation of its power. On the other hand, we are engaging in a conflict with the rest of the world and our regime will not last long under such pressure.”

Putin has previously expressed nostalgia for the former Soviet Union. He once said the fall of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical disaster of the 20th century. In April 2014, Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk told NBC News that Putin wants to restore the Soviet Union. Putin’s actions have indicated Yatsenyuk may be correct. Putin invested unused Olympic funds to start a fitness program that dates back to the Soviet Union. Putin also praisedthe horrific Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact in World War II. Russia’s Ministry of Education and Science purged thousands of “unsuitable” textbooks from schools, eliminating the business of many book publishers. The only one left untouched was Soviet-era publisher Enlightenment, which is also owned by Putin’s close friend Arkady Rotenberg. Another example is Putin’s foul language law, which bans profanity in the arts–echoes of the Soviet days.

Communist leader Stalin murdered more people than Nazi leader Adolf Hitler. Georgian historian Roy Medvedev listed the atrocities committed under Stalin:

Medevedev’s grim bookkeeping included the following tragic episodes: 1 million imprisoned or exiled between 1927 to 1929; 9 to 11 million peasants forced off their lands and another 2 to 3 million peasants arrested or exiled in the mass collectivization program; 6 to 7 million killed by an artificial famine in 1932-1934; 1 million exiled from Moscow and Leningrad in 1935; 1 million executed during the ”Great Terror” of 1937-1938; 4 to 6 million dispatched to forced labor camps; 10 to 12 million people forcibly relocated during World War II; and at least 1 million arrested for various “political crimes” from 1946 to 1953.

Author Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn claims the number is closer to 60 million, while writer I.G. Dyadkin suggests the number is between 56 and 62 million, “with 34 to 49 million directly linked to Stalin.”

Stalin conducted the Great Purge between 1936 and 1940, which eliminated Communist Party and government officials Stalin viewed as a threat. Historians believethe numbers of deaths connected to the purge are between 680,000 to 1.2 million.

He also executed the Holodomor, which means “extermination by hunger,” in Ukraine. Between 1932 and 1933, between 2.5 and 7.5 million people died due to aforced famine from Stalin, intended to end the Ukrainian independence movement. Stalin is dear to Russian imperialists for his work in Ukraine, as they consider Kyiv the birthplace of Russia. The regime received mass shipments of grain, but did not distribute enough to civilians. Stalin also forced Ukrainian farmers to participate in collectivization.

Stalin developed the gulags for criminals and those who threatened his regime. Figures show that he imprisoned ten million people between 1934 and 1947, but historians believe the number is higher. Officials believe 15 to as many as 30 million people died in the gulags from 1918 to 1956.

Read More Stories About:

National Security, Russia, Ukraine, Vladimir Putin, communism, Genocide, Communist party, War Crimes, USSR, Josef Stalin,Luhansk