Does the coincidence explain the concurrence of targeting Russia and Iran? هل يفسّر قانون الصدفة تزامن استهداف روسيا وإيران؟

Friday, 5 October 2018

Does the coincidence explain the concurrence of targeting Russia and Iran? هل يفسّر قانون الصدفة تزامن استهداف روسيا وإيران؟

Does the coincidence explain the concurrence of targeting Russia and Iran?

أكتوبر 5, 2018

Washington is involved in the blood of the Russian officers and soldiers and in the blood of the Iranian soldiers, officers, civilians, and children in two planned operations. This was clear in the Russian successive statements which insist to refer to the backgrounds and refuse to consider the aggression as an accident and through the aggression which targeted Iran as programmed and arranged act in order to transfer the battle to the Iranian interior as announced by the Advisor of the Emirati Crown Prince. There are two messages that the American operations room which managed the two incidents wanted to send; first, the embroilment of Gulf hands that can only manipulate in the Arab tribalism in the south of Iran. Second, the embroilment of Israeli hands that can only move freely in the Syrian airspace observed by Russia since its military positioning in 2015 and its holding of understandings and drawing lines of movement regarding the relationship with America, Israel, and Turkey.

The fact that the attackers take countries in the south of Iran such as Netherlands, Denmark, and Britain as headquarters of their leaders does not negate the fact that the Gulf countries are concerned in funding, mobilizing, and following up. The security project is useless unless it is related to stir up the tribalism in the components of the Iranian collective identity, after the Iranian –Kurdish relationships seemed governed by equations of deterrence, and the Iranian-Turkish relationships governed by relations of cooperation in many issues , and the Iranian-Pakistani relationships are open to further coordination and cooperation, but there is no longer way for valuable manipulation in the Kurdish, Baluchi, and Turkman components, and the bet on the tribalism is no longer possible without Pakistani and Turkey as the two sponsors of the largest national sectarian components. Therefore, the Arab tribalism became the only available way for tampering in the Iranian interior, as the tweets of the US President about transforming the conflict to Iran where the Gulf financer and operator interprets the American policies and trends.

Israel seems to be the last American resource to confuse the Russian role in Syria, after the bet on the return of Turkey to the front of the war on Syria fell, and after the Turkish-American relationships became deteriorated concerning the Syrian issue and in many new issues. The bet on the terrorist groups has become above the ability of Washington and these groups, while Israel has the opportunity to wage the experience of modifying the rules of movement in the Syrian airspace through presenting the issue of the Iranian presence in Syria along with the resistance forces as a factor of complicating the Russian -Israeli relationship from the gate of a clash that imposes dialogue and negotiation to draw new rules of engagement rules. Washington betted to make the presence of Iran and the resistance forces agreed legitimate goals between Moscow and Tel Aviv in avoidance of a clash once again, as long as Israel has effective tools in the Russian interior that are similar to what it has in the Israeli interior. Therefore the Russian seeking to avoid the clash becomes more important than searching for the points of disagreement.

The American facts in the two events embroil its owners. Washington wanted to threat Moscow and Tehran in an attempt to go to negotiation in which it has the decision of ensuring security to Russia and Iran in exchange for concessions, most importantly those related to meet the requirements of the Israeli security in Syria that grants a status for America, that is lost till today in the equations of conflict and the negotiation with Russia and Iran. As long as Washington wants to tamper indirectly, Moscow and Tehran seem comfortable for making the direct players paying the cost. Moscow did not make a secret negotiation with Tel Aviv as a result of the incident of the plane, but it made it an entrance for a public confrontation and a reason for redrawing the rules of flight in the Syrian airspace, while Tehran opens the door for minute investigations that lead it to the direct responsibilities in order to react harshly without excuses.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,