Netanyahu looking elsewhere

• And Nato’s Trojan Horse?

Netanyahu’s recent visit to Moscow is the fruit of resolute Russian foreign policy and Russia’s alliance with Syria is at the heart of this policy.

In 2013 the US media broke into a frenzy of accusations directed at Bashar-al-Assad for alleged use of chemical weapons against the civilians in Ghouta chemical attack of 21 August. It was all too reminiscent of the media show down before the Iraq invasion where the weapons of mass destruction were supposed to be found; if all the media from the western world were to be believed. Later these WMDs were termed as weapons of mass disappearance as they were nowhere to be found in the post Saddam Iraq. While Turkey, Israel and Saudi Arabia were quick to jump on the anti-Assad band wagon and Pakistani media was also only, at best, translating the narrative of western media, it was only Russia that challenged the US to put forth the proof of any use of chemical attack by Assad’s forces. The Russian narrative was simple: why would Assad push along with such a tactic in a war that he was winning at the time?

In a dramatic coincidence, three days before the Ghouta attack, a UN mission arrived in Damascus, with permission from the Syrian government, to investigate alleged chemical weapons use from some earlier incidents. It was in the presence of this mission that this attack took place and that too in the proximity of the staying members of the mission for them to fully observe its aftermath. Though the UN mission did provide reports on the attack it could not decisively point its fingers towards the Assad government or otherwise. But that all would have been irrelevant had the all too excited America, Britain and France gone in to an all-out war against Assad supported only by the media and not by any facts. It still remains puzzling why Assad would first allow UN mission for fact finding on earlier accusations of chemical weapons use and then use the same weapons in their presence to jeopardise his own position? The incident had all the ingredients of a false flag operation supported by dubious news organisations.

Turkey displayed its wayward foreign policy when it downed a Russian fighter plane on its border in 2015 putting into jeopardy massive Russian investment into TurkStresm gas-pipeline project

To the dismay of all western war mongers in the media, Vladimir Putin asserted that the Unites Stated should bring in credible evidence against the Assad regime in the UN before holding it culpable. Western world, which only sought its license of invasion from CNN earlier, had to contend with the rise of another power which could put its claims to question. Obama called the Ghouta chemical attack a breach of his ‘red line’ in Syria, but could not take any decisive step against the Assad regime. This made the western media unleash its fury on Obama for inaction against Bashar-al-Assad, calling this an official end of America’s sole superpower status.

This all happened at the height of the ‘remove Bashar-al-Assad campaign’ of the western media and a chemical attack by Bashar-al-Assad did fit nicely with already avowed American willingness to dictate Syrian fate at gunpoint. But Russia was to change the course of chain interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan and in Libya. The strange trio of Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Israel, having an anti-Assad stance and getting increasingly welcoming for a US led attack on Syria, were now left to respect the Russian narrative.

It was the direct result of Russian resilience on the Syrian issue that led to the Saudi King’s ground breaking visit to Russia; and also, an even more unprecedented consequence of Russian policy on Syria was bringing Iran and Turkey on the same table in Sochi, in November last year, to build some consensus regarding Syria. This was a game changer for the Middle East. It is in this scenario that Turkey has moved in Syria’s Idlib and that explains a rather muted response from Russia on the issue. On Wednesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, in a telephonic conversation communicated their mutual satisfaction on the results of the Syrian National Dialogue Congress that was held in the Russian resort city of Sochi on January 30; another sign that Turkey’s military action against armed groups in Syria has some consent from Russia.

What also originated from the Russia’s support of Bashar-al-Assad is that Israel, for the first time in its history, has to look beyond Britain and America. On Monday, Netanyahu flew to Moscow to share his concerns over Iran’s increasing influence in Syria. This in itself is a sign of all signs that America’s license towards Israel’s foreign policy in the Middle East is no more fully effective. Overall, Netanyahu’s visit went missing from the media’s radars as no worthy statement or joint press-conference succeeded it. It seems that there was nothing substantial that Netanyahu could gain regarding Syria and Iran. While America has started doubting an agreement it went into with Iran just like it doubted and then reneged from an agreement with North Korea, Russian foreign policy stands on stronger footings regarding its alliances. Netanyahu suggested in a tweet that Iran’s intention to place ‘high precision weapons’ in Lebanon was also discussed in talks with Putin in the said visit. Netanyahu’s statement can mean that Israel might show its military muscles in Lebanon, as for now Syria seems a dangerous proposition for it, courtesy Mr Putin.

While Iran, Syria and Russia can rely on each other, Turkey is a weak link in the Russian equation. As a NATO member and a long term American ally Turkey might end up being a temporary ally of Russia. Turkey displayed its wayward foreign policy when it downed a Russian fighter plane on its border in 2015 putting into jeopardy massive Russian investment into TurkStresm gas-pipeline project; (the project is now moving swiftly). It is evident that in heightened tensions between NATO and Russia, Turkey favours its NATO status as it also suits its anti-Bashar policy. Turkey has always been as keen as Israel in its acceptance of western aggression against Bashar government and it might end up being NATO’s Trojan horse for Russia.