October 9, 2017 – Fort Russ News –
– Boris Dzherelievsky in Kolokolrossia.ru, translated by Tom Winter –
“Using an analogy from the field of medicine, it can be said that the countries of the “Trio” make it clear that they intend to fight first of all with the cause of the disease, and not just with its symptoms.”
Moscow, Tehran, and Ankara have opened an anti-Western front. In Iran, the possibility has been raised of recognizing the US armed forces as a terrorist structure, just like the organization “Islamic State” (IS) banned in Russia. Head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Mohammad Ali Jafari, speaking at a meeting of the corps leaders, warned that in case the IRGC is recognized as the terrorist organization in Washington (as has been stated in Washington), Iran will treat the US Army as a combatant.
White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said that Donald Trump planned to announce the annulment of the nuclear agreement with Iran this week and would present a comprehensive strategy for Tehran. In light of this, Jafari stressed that the adoption of any new restrictive measures against Iran would in fact mean the US withdrawal from the agreement on the Iranian nuclear program.
According to Jafari, new sanctions from Washington will rule out the possibility of further cooperation between the two countries.
Let us note that the statement about the possible recognition of the identity of the American armed forces as terrorists should not be viewed in the plane of mutual accusations and quarrels, which has become the “corporate style” of American foreign policy under Trump. The special services and armed forces of the United States have been conducting a real terrorist war against Iran for a long time, training and sending terrorist gangs to its territory, as Tehran has repeatedly claimed. However, the need to somehow interact with the United States kept the Iranians from officially acknowledging the fact that the US security forces have been turned into terrorist organizations.
We recall that earlier that direct interaction and cooperation between the US military contingent in Syria and the terrorists of the IS was declared by the official representative of the Ministry of Defense of Russia Igor Konashenkov, warning that such actions directed against Russian and Allied forces will be stopped by force of arms. (Konashenkov reinforced the facts shown in the course of the speeches with images from space).
Also with accusations of the West in support of terrorists, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan stated, speaking to activists of the ruling Justice and Development Party in Afyon on October 8: “IS, Al-Qaeda (also banned in Russia), and PKK (Workers’ Party of Kurdistan banned in Turkey) — behind all these organizations you will see the shadow of the West. All of them find refuge in the West. And where is FETO (the organization of the oppositional Islamic preacher Fethullah Gülen)? Also in the West. They receive very serious material support,” Erdogan said, thus being in solidarity with two of his partners, or rather, allies in the “Syrian Trio.”
Thus, Moscow, Tehran, and Ankara are in the open as a united front against the United States, and quite reasonably. This circumstance clearly indicates that the existing union does not intend to confine itself solely to the problems of fighting the IS and Al Qaeda or with Kurdish separatism (this issue is mainly concerned with Ankara and Iran). Using an analogy from the field of medicine, it can be said that the countries of the “Trio” make it clear that they intend to fight first of all with the cause of the disease, and not just with its symptoms.
And this approach justifies itself, as there seems to be obvious progress in the situation with the Iraqi Kurdistan. So, the Speaker of the Iraqi Parliament Salim al-Jaburi went today to Erbil to meet with the head of Iraqi Kurdistan, Massoud Barzani. Earlier, al-Jaburi told RIA Novosti that he intends to hold “a series of meetings, including with the leaders of Iraqi Kurdistan, to resolve the crisis in relations between Baghdad and the autonomous region.” And the day before the head of the office of the leader of the Iraqi Kurdistan leader Fuad Hussein stated that “Barzani and the Iraqi vice-presidents Ayad Allawi and Usama al-Nujaifi agreed at the meeting in Sulaimaniyah about the immediate lifting of sanctions” from the Kurdish autonomy. Recall that Baghdad declared the referendum illegitimate and stressed that it is not going to hold talks with the autonomy government on the results of voting, and imposed sanctions against Iraqi Kurdistan, among them – the suspension of international air traffic with the region. Thus, the mere fact of the beginning of negotiations and the lifting of sanctions mean only one thing: the leadership of the autonomy refused to declare independence and provided Baghdad with convincing guarantees. There is nothing surprising in this – the concerted actions of Iraq, Turkey and Iran did not leave a single chance to the Kurdish separatists. And the American-Israeli “friends” could not help in such a situation – Turkey has long been “torn from their hook”, and their methods of backroom pressure have not worked on Iran since the time of the Islamic revolution. That is, there was a hope that the allies will be able to resolve the issue with the rebellious autonomy without blood – using only political and economic methods backed by military demonstrations at the borders.
Basically, Masud Barzani is a pragmatic person, and this is not the first time he has radically changed his political course. It is likely that he is ready to convert the results of the referendum into certain preferences for autonomy (and himself) from Baghdad. The only question is whether this peaceful end to the mutiny will stymy Tel Aviv and Washington and their agents in Iraqi Kurdistan. However, their actions in this case will be directed against Barzani. And they will lead to a split in the already not very strong unity of the Kurds in the province. And also to the delegitimization of the process of movement towards independence. However, let us return to the US accusing the Syrian trio of supporting and using terrorists. Let’s note, that more recently in Moscow and Ankara they have spoken about hypothetical possibility of interaction with the West and Israel in struggle against terrorism. These statements didn’t come about because our countries did not have information that terrorism was primarily a product of Western special services and their main instrument of global and regional domination. All this was well known. But, “the involvement of the West in the fight against terrorism” became a kind of “buffer” or “screen,” which maintained by Moscow and Ankara pretending to believe in the good intentions declared in the West, in order to avoid direct confrontation with the US and its allies. However, today there is no space and no chance for this kind of maneuvers. But the most important thing is that the alliance of the three powers today feels strong enough not to be afraid of direct confrontation, it challenges Washington. The “cover” is discarded, things are named by their names.
*the original headline puts it more strongly, in the same words as the frst sentence of this translation:
“Moscow, Teheran, and Ankara have opened an anti-western front”