Why the Russian intervention in Syria may proved to be a well-set Western trap

Complicated Cold War 2.0 games over Syria

by system failure

In our previous article, Three main reasons for which NATO is not attacking Russia right now, we described how the US and NATO may seeking Russia and Iran to get involved to war in Syria, after they lost control of ISIS and brought absolute chaos in Middle East.

It is obvious that the US strategy to arm and train militants against Assad has failed. He managed to remain in power, despite the chaos, with the help of Russia and Iran of course. What Washington and its allies did so far, was to pretend that they are bombing ISIS, without, of course, risking to proceed in a ground operation, which would only made things worse for them.

However, dragging Russia in the Middle East front, is probably part of Washington's changing strategy at this moment, and has two main targets:

The first target is to allow the US to withdraw progressively any forces from the Syrian mess, avoiding another endless attrition war. At the same time, Washington will start a new propaganda war to pass the blame for the mess to Putin and his allies. Simultaneously, Washington hopes to restore, to some degree, the relations with the European allies, as many of them are dissatisfied with the US policy, which generated the huge problem of the fleeing refugees, finding Europe totally unprepared to deal with it. Putin will be considered responsible for the new waves of refugees.

As Paul Craig Roberts writes:

      “Sputnik news reports that some high-level security advisors to Obama have advised him to withdraw US military forces from Syria and give up his plan to overthrow Assad. They advised Obama to cooperate with Russia in order to stop the refugee flow that is overwhelming Washington’s vassals in Europe. The influx of unwanted peoples is making Europeans aware of the high cost of enabling US foreign policy. Advisors have told Obama that the idiocy of the neoconservatives’ policies threaten Washington’s empire in Europe.” (www.paulcraigroberts.org)

The second target, is to drag Russia into what the US try to avoid: an endless attrition war. Putin could be trapped in a condition similar to that of the Soviets in Afghanistan, although probably not for such a long period. What the US and their European allies failed to do in Ukraine, may be achieved now.

The US will probably continue to arm militants in Syria, keeping Putin busy, at least until 2016 presidential elections. With a more willing puppet than Obama to follow neocon agenda (any GOP, or Hillary), Washington may then open a new front in the Russian borders. Western media focused on the recent win of Alexander Lukashenko, while insist to call him 'last dictator of Europe'.

It is not accidental that Lukashenko opposed Western-backed "shock therapy" during the post-Soviet transition. The one that under IMF mafia destroyed Russian economy in the late 90s. Maybe the various US think tanks design another 'color revolution' in Belarus this time, as the game in Ukraine appears to be lost for now.

On the other hand, Putin's effectiveness in Syria may turn against the US plans. In case that Russian troops together with the Syrian army and the other allies, manage to 'clean' Syria and Iraq from Jihadists through a fast and massive operation, Putin will gain plenty of points in the international community, while the West will appear unreliable. This will be a significant defeat for the Western bloc in the new Cold War.

However, every side has to face now a new reality. As long as there are lunatic fanatics who are determined to kill themselves in suicide bombings, no army, no tactic will ever be able to clean the mess. And even worse, such actions can be planned away from the war zones, taking more innocent lives, like we already witnessed in the Western world and recently in Turkey.

Also:

Another reason why the West wanted Russia to get involved in the Syrian mess

West 'ignored Russian offer in 2012 to have Syria's Assad step aside'