The US-NATO War on Syria: Western Naval Forces Confront Russia Off the Syrian Coastline?

Video: General Wesley Clark - 7 Countries in 5 Years

By: Michel Chossudovsky

Source: Global Research

“As I went back through the Pentagon in November 2001, one of the senior military staff officers had time for a chat. Yes, we were still on track for going against Iraq, he said. But there was more. This was being discussed as part of a five-year campaign plan, he said, and there were a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia, and Sudan."
Former Nato Commander General Wesley Clark
"Let me say to the soldiers and officials still supporting the Syrian regime -- the Syrian people will remember the choices you make in the coming days...."
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Friends of Syria conference in Paris' July 7, 2012

While confrontation between Russia and the West was, until recently, confined to the polite ambit of international diplomacy, within the confines of the UN Nations Security Council, an uncertain and perilous situation is now unfolding in the Eastern Mediterranean

"Polite Diplomacy" (without smiles). Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (L) and Russia's Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov meet in St. Petersbourg, June 29, 2012

Allied forces including intelligence operatives and special forces have reinforced their presence on the ground in Syria following the UN stalemate. Meanwhile, coinciding with the UN Security Council deadlock, Moscow has dispatched to the Mediterranean a flotilla of ten Russian warships and escort vessels led by the Admiral Chabanenko anti-submarine destroyer. Russia's flotilla is currently stationed off the Southern Syrian coastline.

Back in August of last year, Russia's Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin warned that "NATO is planning a military campaign against Syria to help overthrow the regime of President Bashar al-Assad with a long-reaching goal of preparing a beachhead for an attack on Iran,..." In relation to the current naval deployment, Russia’s navy chief, Vice Admiral Viktor Chirkov, confirmed, however, that while the [Russian] flotilla was carrying marines, the warships would "not be engaged in Syria Tasks". "The ships will perform "planned military manoeuvres", said the [Russian Defense] ministry"

The US-NATO alliance has retorted to Russia's naval initiative, with a much larger naval deployment, a formidable Western armada, consisting of British, French and American warships, slated to be deployed later this Summer in the Eastern Mediterranean, leading to a potential "Cold War style confrontation" between Russian and Western naval forces.

Meanwhile, US-NATO military planners have announced that various "military options" and "intervention scenarios" are being contemplated in the wake of the Russian-Chinese veto in the UN Security Council.
The planned naval deployment is coordinated with allied ground operations in support of the US-NATO sponsored "Free Syrian Army"(FSA). In this regard, US-NATO has speeded up the recruitment of foreign fighters trained in Turkey, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

(Russian warships enter the Med, bound for Syria - timesofmalta.com, July 24, 2012)

Franco-British War Games: "Warship Diplomacy"

France and Britain will be participating later this Summer in war games codenamed Exercise Cougar 12 [2012]. The games will be conducted in the Eastern Mediterranean as part of a Franco-British "Response Force Task Group" involving Britain's HMS Bulwark and France's Charles De Gaulle carrier battle group. The focus of these naval exercises will be on amphibious operations involving the (planned simulated) landing ashore of troops on "enemy territory".

Britain's HMS Bulwark

France's Charles De Gaulle aircraft carrier

Smokescreen: The Proposed Evacuation of Western Nationals "Using a Humanitarian Naval Fleet of WMDs"

Barely mentioned by the mainstream media, the warships involved in the Cougar 12 naval exercise will also participate in the planned evacuation of "British nationals from the Middle East, should the ongoing conflict in Syria further spill across borders into neighboring Lebanon and Jordan.":

The British would likely send the HMS Illustrious, a helicopter carrier, along with the HMS Bulwark, an amphibious ship, as well as an advanced destroyer to provide defenses for the task force. On board will be several hundred Royal Marine commandos, as well as a complement of AH-64 attack helicopters (the same ones used in Libya last year). A fleet of French ships, including the Charles De Gaulle aircraft carrier, carrying a complement of Rafale fighter aircraft, are expected to join them.
Those forces are expected stay offshore and could escort specially chartered civilian ships meant to pick up foreign nationals fleeing Syria and surrounding countries. (ibtimes.com, 24 July 2012).

Sources in the British Ministry of Defense, while confirming the Royal Navy's "humanitarian mandate" in the planned evacuation program, have categorically denied "any intention of a combat role for British forces [against Syria]".
The evacuation plan using the most advanced military hardware including the HMS Bulwark, the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier is an obvious smokescreen. The not so hidden agenda is military threat and intimidation directed against a sovereign nation located at the cradle of civilization in Mespotamia:

"The Charles De Gaulle alone is a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier with an entire squadron of jets more advanced than anything the Syrians have -- is sparking speculation that those forces could become involved in a NATO operation against Syrian forces loyal to Bashar al-Assad...
The HMS Illustrious, which is currently sitting on the Thames in central London, will likely only be sent to the region after the end of the Olympics." (Ibid)

This impressive deployment of Franco-British naval power could also include the USS John C. Stennis aircraft carrier, which is to be sent back to the Middle East:

[On July 16, 2912], the Pentagon also confirmed that it would be redeploying the USS John C. Stennis, a nuclear-powered supercarrier capable of carrying 90 aircraft, to the Middle East... The Stennis would be arriving in the region with an advanced missile-launching cruiser, .... The carrier USS Eisenhower is already expected to be in the Middle East by that time (two carriers currently in the region are to be relieved and sent back to the U.S.).

Amid unpredictable situations in both Syria and Iran, that would have left U.S. forces stretched and overly burdened if a firm military response were needed in either circumstance.

USS Stennis aircraft carrier

The USS Stennis strike group is to be sent back to the Middle East "by an unspecified date in the late summer" to be deployed to the Central Command area of responsibility:

"The Defense Department said that the early deployment had come from a request made by Marine Corps General James N. Mattis, the commander for Central Command (the U.S. military authority area that covers the Middle East), partly out of concern that there would be a short period where only one carrier would be located in the region." ((Strike group headed to Central Command early - Stripes Central - Stripes, July 16, 2012)

Marine Gen. James Mattis, commander of U.S. Central Command, "asked to move up the strike group’s deployment based on “a range of factors,” and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta approved it"... (Ibid)

A Pentagon spokesman stated that the deployment shift of the USS Stennis pertained to "a wide range of U.S. security interests in the region". "We’re always mindful of the challenges posed by Iran. Let me be very clear: This is not a decision that is based solely on the challenges posed by Iran, ... " This is not about any one particular country or one particular threat.” intimating that Syria was also part of planned deployment. (Ibid, emphasis added)

"Intervention Scenarios"

This massive deployment of naval power is an act of coercion with a view to terrorizing the Syrian people. The threat of military intervention purports to destabilize Syria as a nation state as well confront and weaken Russia's role in brokering the Syrian crisis.

The UN diplomatic game is at an impasse. The UN Security Council is defunct. The transition is towards Twenty-first Century "Warship Diplomacy".

While an all out allied military operation directed against Syria is not "officially" contemplated, military planners are currently involved in preparing various "intervention scenarios":

‘Western political leaders may have no appetite for deeper intervention. But as history has shown, we do not always choose which wars to fight - sometimes wars choose us. ‘Military planners have a responsibility to prepare for intervention options in Syria for their political masters in case this conflict chooses them. ‘Preparation will be proceeding today in several Western capitals and on the ground in Syria and in Turkey. ‘Up to the point of Assad’s collapse, we are most likely to see a continuation or intensification of the under-the-radar options of financial support, arming and advising the rebels, clandestine operations and perhaps cyber warfare from the West. ‘After any collapse, however, the military options will be seen in a different light.’ (Daily Mail, July 24, 2012, emphasis added)

Concluding Remarks

The World is at a dangerous crossroads. The shape of this planned naval deployment in the Eastern Mediterranean with US-NATO warships contiguous to those of Russia is unprecedented in recent history.

History tells us that wars are often triggered unexpectedly as a result of "political mistakes" and human error. The latter are all the more likely within the realm of a divisive and corrupt political system in the US and Western Europe.

US-NATO military planning is overseen by a centralized military hierarchy. Command and Control operations are in theory "coordinated" but in practice they are often marked by human error. Intelligence operatives often function independently and outside the realm of political accountability.

Military planners are acutely aware of the dangers of escalation. Syria has significant air defense capabilities as well as ground forces. Syria has been building up its air defense system with the delivery of Russian Pantsir S1 air-defense missiles.

Any form of US-NATO direct military intervention against Syria would destabilize the entire region, potentially leading to escalation over a vast geographical area, extending from the Eastern Mediterranean to the Afghanistan-Pakistan border with Tajikistan and China.

Military planning involves intricate scenarios and war games by both sides including military options pertaining to advanced weapons systems. A Third World War scenario has been contemplated by US-NATO-Israeli military planners since early 2000.

Escalation is an integral part of the military agenda. War preparations to attack Syria and Iran have been in "an advanced state of readiness" for several years.

We are dealing with complex political and strategic decision-making involving the interplay of powerful economic interest groups, the actions of covert intelligence operatives.

The role of war propaganda is paramount not only in moulding public opinion into accepting a war agenda, but also in establishing a consensus within the upper echelons of the decision-making process. A selective form of war propaganda intended for "Top Officials" in government agencies, intelligence, the Military, law enforcement, etc. is intended to create an unbending consensus in favor of war and the Police State.

For the war project to go ahead, it is essential that both politicians and military planners are rightfully committed to leading the war "in the name of justice and democracy". For this to occur, they must firmly believe in their own propaganda, namely that war is an instrument of peace and democracy.

They have no concern for the devastating impacts of advanced weapons systems, routinely categorized as "collateral damage", let alone the meaning and significance of pre-emptive warfare, using nuclear weapons.

Wars are invariably decided upon by civilian leaders and interest groups rather than by the military. War serves dominant economic interests which operate from behind the scenes, behind closed doors in corporate boardrooms, in the Washington think tanks, etc.

War propaganda, namely media lies, constitutes the most powerful instrument of warfare.

Without media disinformation, the US-NATO led war agenda would collapse like a deck of cards. The legitimacy of the war criminals in high office would be broken.

It is therefore essential to disarm not only the mainstream media but also a segment of the self proclaimed "progressive" alternative media, which has provided legitimacy to NATO's "Responsibility to protect" (R2P) mandate, largely with a view to dismantling the antiwar movement.

The road to Tehran goes through Damascus. A US-NATO sponsored war on Iran would involve, as a first step, the destabilization of Syria as a nation state. Military planning pertaining to Syria is an integral part of the war on Iran agenda.

A war on Syria could evolve towards a US-NATO military campaign directed against Iran, in which Turkey and Israel would be directly involved.
It is crucial to spread the word and break the channels of media disinformation.

A critical and unbiased understanding of what is happening in Syria is of crucial importance in reversing the tide of military escalation towards a broader regional war.

Our objective is ultimately to dismantle the US-NATO-Israeli military arsenal and restore World Peace.
Spread the word. Forward this article. Post it on Facebook.

Please visit Global Research for more information by Dr. Michel Chossudovsky

Russia, China to trade naval know-how in drills (VIDEO, PHOTOS)

Russia, China to trade naval know-how in drills

Source: Russia Today
http://rt.com/news/russia-china-drills-warships-679/

Four Russian warships have docked at a Chinese naval base near Qingdao, a port in the south of the country. They are taking a break from guarding vessels in pirate-infested waters near Somalia for joint military drills.

The Russian-Chinese maneuvers dubbed Naval Cooperation-2012 began in the Yellow Sea this Sunday. The exercises are designed to build on what both forces have been doing in the past couple of years in the Gulf of Aden to counter piracy.

Both Chinese and Russian warships have escorted civilian convoys off the coast of Somalia. One of the Russian destroyers, Marshal Shaposhnikov, was instrumental in saving the oil-tanker Moscow University a year ago, when it was captured by pirates who held 23 Russian sailors hostage.

Russian destroyers are used to guarding convoys of between five and 14 merchant ships as they travel in the dangerous waters of the Gulf of Aden. The seamen will now learn to make it a joint effort with their Chinese colleagues.

Three Russian destroyers – Marshal Shaposhnikov, Admiral Vinogradov and Admiral Tributs – are taking part in the drills, along with the missile cruiser Varyag and several support ships. They will be joined by 16 Chinese surface ships.

At the port of Qingdao they are accompanied by the flagship of China's Northern Fleet – the Luhu-class guided missile destroyer Harbin

Photos taken onboard the Admiral Vinogradov destroyer

Like other Chinese ships in the harbor it looks brand new. The Russian crews were invited on board on Sunday to inspect the vessel for themselves. Chinese sailors visited the destroyer Admiral Vinogradov. The sailors tried immediately to make friends, exchanging “hellos” and “how are yous” in the language of their future mission mates.

Over the next few days, the groundwork will be laid for a joint exercise at sea. Those in command are in the process of painstakingly placing the future locations of the ships on the map.

Photos taken onboard the Admiral Vinogradov destroyer

"The exercises will involve several simulated missions, including the rescue of a hijacked ship, the escort of a commercial vessel, and the defense of a convoy from air and sea attacks," a Russian Defense Ministry spokesman said.

Other missions on the agenda are protection of marine lines of communication, and joint supply operations.

Russia has long been a major naval power, while the Chinese navy has been expanding dramatically recently, a strategy to include operations away from its own waters rather than just defensive procedures nearer home

Photos taken onboard the Admiral Vinogradov destroyer

Both sides stress the war games are not directed against any particular country or military bloc. However, there is increasing concern in both Moscow and Beijing about the US naval build-up in the Asia Pacific. Not to mention the Japanese and South Korean naval forces too – close allies with the US.

Signs of Japanese and South Korean activity were noticeable when the Russian convoy, traveling from Vladivostok, was frequently followed by NATO reconnaissance planes, destroyers and submarines

Photos taken onboard the Admiral Vinogradov destroyer

After final preparations by commanding officers, the whole fleet will leave Qingdao, to start the naval part of the War Games. They will commence on April 25 and continue for just two days.

A parade of the ships is expected to take place on April 27, followed by the departure of the Russian naval convoy.

While the ships are being prepared for the exercise the crews have some free time, visiting the city (Qingdao is currently one of the fastest-growing ports on the Chinese Yellow Sea coast). The sailors will also compete in sports such as volleyball, basketball and soccer.

China and US lock and load ahead of showdown in the Pacific

Reuters/ US-Philippines joint exercises

Source: Russia Today
http://rt.com/news/china-us-military-pacific-219/

As another round of all-too-realistic war games has kicked off in Taiwan and the Philippines, the Pacific looks to become the next flashpoint of conflict. And this time the major players are the world’s two biggest economies – the US and China.

4,500 US troops are participating in an annual military exercise in the Philippines, just a week after a diplomatic incident that provoked a standoff between Chinese and Filipino warships. Simultaneously, thousands of Taiwanese troops are repelling a simulated Chinese attack on the island, whose independence its bigger neighbor refuses to recognize.

At first glance, China is entangled in regional disputes that have little consequence for the rest of the world. The South China Sea is potentially rich in oil, and already provides valuable shipping lanes and fishing stocks. China says it is entitled to treat the sea almost in its entirety as its own on the basis of a sixty-year-old claim, and in apparent violation of standard international maritime treaties. The Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei have counter-claims.

Last week a Filipino warship attempted to arrest two Chinese fishing boats operating in what it says is its segment of the sea. But two Chinese surveillance ships arrived and began to shield the fishing boats, preventing the arrests. Heated rhetoric followed from both Manila and Beijing.

But this is essentially a commercial dispute, only slightly spiced up by nationalistic grandstanding.

Taiwan and Tibet’s sovereignty disputes are long-festering sores. But despite China’s insistence on reintegration, and the territories' drives for full independence, no sides are likely to take active steps to upset the status quo.

Defense budget or offense budget?

Nonetheless, the rise in tension is palpable.

And the elephant in the Pacific is China’s ballooning defense budget. In just ten years it has quadrupled, and now stands only behind that of the United States. The estimate is that the Chinese are spending $120 billion on their military every year, though outside observers do not know the exact numbers – or just what all the money is being spent on.

But no one doubts that China is militarizing. Once a blunt force that prided itself on its manpower, the People’s Liberation Army is still the world’s biggest – with 2.3 million active servicemen. But the focus now is on advanced technology and better co-ordination that would allow the country to build an army capable of winning a decisive regional 21st century conflict, not a long-term traditional war.

In addition to importing top-of-the-line technology from Russia, China is developing its own. American officials claim that an army of Chinese hackers are working day and night to steal cutting edge technologies from the government and top military contractors. It's not much of a surprise, considering China’s traditionally lax attitude towards intellectual property.

US military planners and analysts commonly believe that China wants to gain total control of the seas in its region, up to what it refers to as the first island chain around its coasts – one that encompasses the South China Sea, and most importantly Taiwan. Rapidly increasing its naval capability, and aiming thousands of missiles at the sea, the PLA wants to make China’s coast a no-go area for the roaming US Navy, a key protector of many regional American allies.

If China feels like it has achieved regional superiority, the current balance of power will be upset, and the consequences, at least for its neighbors, could be momentous.

The new Pacific doctrine

The US is hardly sitting still.

After being bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan for a more than a decade, the United States has officially announced that it will “rebalance,” shifting major forces to the pacific.

Although Washington says it will delay building a planned multi-billion super base in Guam, it will still bolster its existing sites, bring more troops and equipment, and conduct frequent military exercises – to the obvious chagrin of China, and the US bête noire and true wildcard – North Korea.

The sides also seem to have a tenuous grasp of each other’s motives. American officials bemoan the opaqueness of the Chinese Communist Party, whose decisions are often unpredictable or unreadable. Meanwhile, China has no trust in the US' stated mission of preserving the peace. Chinese officials often accuse the Americans of “colonialism,” and believe most of Washington's actions to be fueled by national interest, not the ostensible concern for self-determination or human rights. They also believe that US uses allies such as the Philippines as its proxies – offering them money and protection in exchange for influence.

China’s rapid social changes have so far failed to shift the country from a path of moderation. But as the country grows into its new-found economic power, it may become more assertive politically. The country is already broadening its reach by taking a leading role in many UN military missions, but some see this as simply training for the Chinese army for future regional conflicts.

The biggest guarantor of stability remains the economic co-dependence between both countries. The US is China’s biggest trading partner, while China is the United States’ second biggest.

So it comes down to China’s rapid rise, versus America’s desire to remain the leading global power. And as the nuclear powers face each other, an out-and-out conflict seems unthinkable, but major international incidents – perhaps between China and US allies – are almost inevitable.

China slams US South Korea naval drills

An aircraft (rear) takes off on the flight deck of the US
nuclear-powered aircraft carrier during the US-South
Korea joint naval and air exercise on the open seas east
of South Korea.



Source: Press TV
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=138577§ionid=351020404


A senior Chinese official has strongly condemned the second round of joint US-South Korea naval exercises.

Rear Admiral Yang Yi wrote in a commentary published in Friday edition of China Daily that the drills are a fresh provocation "to China and its surrounding region."

He said Washington will pay a "costly price" for its decision to participate in new military exercises near China.

"On the one hand, it wants China to play a role in regional security issues. On the other hand, it is engaging in an increasingly tight encirclement of China and constantly challenging China's core interests," Yang said.

The drills are the second US-South Korean war games recently conducted close to Chinese waters.

In July, the US and South Korea conducted massive joint sea and air drills. Those exercises were also condemned by Beijing.

China has already reduced its military cooperation with the Pentagon over the 6.4-billion-dollar US arms sales to Taiwan. China considers the island as part of its territory.

Seoul says the drills come in response to the North's alleged torpedo attack on a South Korean warship in March, which claims 46 lives.

Pyongyang denies any involvement in the sinking of the warship.

North Korea's military has described the war games as a direct military invasion.