Our thanks to Hiroyuki Hamada for bringing this to our attention.
A few instructive angles on recent Israeli attack against Syria and Idlib deal.
First, from Luciana Bohne’s wall:
“Mourn but don’t lose your head.
On Monday, yesterday, Russia and Turkey agree on a “demilitarized zone” in Idlib, but it is not to be permanent. Who gains? Nobody. Well, not much. The “demilitarized zone” is not to be permanent, anyway. Russia and Syria did not have Idlib as an imminent target in mind, probably not until after mid-October.
Agreeing on a demilitarized zone does not disrupt the plan for eventual attack on Idlib by Syria and allies. Turkey thinks to please NATO chums for reinforcing their fake stance as concerned humanitarians.
The demilitarized zone does not prohibit presence by “opposition” forces. This could mean that forces supported by Turkey will flock there and Turkey will scoop them up and take them to safety across the border. Which will leave al-Qaeda/Nusra (HTS) to deal with.
But, while Turkey fiddles, her NATO allies are still not happy. They seek an excuse to intevene and escalate the war in Syria.
So, on Tuesday, Israel and France down a Russian military plane, killing 14 Russian personnel. It’s a provocation.–one of very many Syria has endured and quite a few Russia has, too.
But Russia doesn’t take the bait. There’s nothing to gain by retaliation. The plan remains the same: liberation of Idlib will come. So Russia calls this provocation “accidental.”
Wars are not won by losing one’s head every time the enemy provokes–even at a wanton and a criminal act, a war crime, such as the one perpetrated by France and Israel.
If Russia had responded to every provocation from 2015, where would Syria be now?”
Also, Syriana Analysis gives us an insightful angle which illustrates pragmatic dynamics on the ground revolving around the Idlib deal.
From Vanessa Beeley’s wall:
“Kevork Almassian writes:
The Russian-Turkish agreement for Idlib is not a bad deal and if Turkey implements it, it could achieve a number of objectives:
1- Erdogan abandons his parallel terrorist army, meaning the most radical groups in Idlib and the taking over heavy weapons from all armed groups until 9 December in a 20KM demilitarized zone.
2- Contain NATO threat and ensure that Turkey remains close to Russia and whether we like or not, this equation serves indirectly the Syrian interests. Ankara in the arms of Washington brought us ISIS and Al-Nusra Front. Ankara, close to Moscow, resulted in the agreement of de-escalation zones, which later led to the liberation of vast areas from terrorists’ hands.
3- Solving the issue of Idlib gradually starts with pulling the heavy weapons and the separation Al-Nusra Front from smaller terror groups, which will make the latter like a dog who lost his teeth. They will bark loud without causing serious damage.
On the other hand, this agreement maintains the influence of Turkey in an area whose people echo Erdogan more than “God”.”