jueves, 29 de diciembre de 2016

Invierno, Europa, Rusia y gas


La nota que sigue puede resultar instructiva a aquellos que todavía creen que la compra y venta de energéticos (en particular, petróleo y gas, la sangre de la economía contemporánea) sigue las "leyes de la oferta y la demanda". Leemos en el sitio web Strategic Culture Foundation la siguiente nota de Piotr Iskenderov: 


Título: Who Wants to Keep Gas Flowing Through Ukraine and Why?

Texto: This past year of 2016 set a new record for the export history of Gazprom, Russia’s biggest gas company. Its chairman, Alexey Miller, has claimed that by the end of the year Gazprom will have shipped a total of 180 billion cubic meters to non-CIS countries.

Gazprom had only planned to export between 166 and 170 billion cubic meters of gas in 2016 (in 2015, 158.56 billion cubic meters of gas were delivered to non-CIS countries).

But even this new high is not the limit. Gazprom’s latest calculations envision a further uptick in shipments in 2017, and those will primarily be to the European Union. The key factors here are, first and foremost, the weather conditions (this winter promises to be a more severe one in Europe than last year), and second - the jump in demand for gas in Europe that has been seen in recent months in the face of lower domestic production in EU countries.

The biggest consumers of Russian gas are still Germany (47.4 billion cubic meters in 2015), Turkey (27 billion), Italy (24.4 billion), Great Britain (22.5 billion), and France (10.5 billion). And Russian gas shipments play a very important role in ensuring the energy security of Southeastern Europe. In 2015 Bulgaria purchased 3.1 billion cubic meters of gas from the companies that make up the Gazprom Group, while Greece bought 2 billion cubic meters, Serbia - 1.9 billion cubic meters, and Croatia - 0.6 billion cubic meters.

The market price for Russian gas has taken some interesting twists and turns. It is worth noting that that figure has risen right along with the increase in supply. This proves once again that the close interdependence of European consumers and Russian energy suppliers is «overriding» the market formula: simultaneous growth in both supply and price is an atypical phenomenon in a market environment, however, it proves once again that any moves aimed at «replacing» Russian gas or «displacing» Russia from the EU gas market might be disruptive for Europe’s energy sector.

The attempts by some countries to block Russian gas supplies look particularly irrational in this context. This primarily applies to Poland, which rushed to the European Court to appeal the European Commission’s decision to allow Gazprom greater access to the OPAL pipeline that links Nord Stream with the gas-transit system of Central and Western Europe.

The Polish media cites the official spokesperson for the Polish Ministry of Finance, Joanna Wajda, in its reports that Warsaw has already asked the European Union to suspend the implementation of the European Commission (EC) decision. The EC’s official reaction to this proposal is still unknown, but it will be interesting to see.

The OPAL gas pipeline has a capacity of 36 billion cubic meters of gas per year, but Germany’s network regulator has only been permitting Gazprom to use 50% of that, meaning that it can pump no more than 18 billion cubic meters of gas annually. The European Commission ruled in October (which should take effect on Jan. 1, 2017) that Gazprom may bid for the right to pump another 7.7-10.2 billion cubic meters of gas through that pipeline, thus using an additional 21-28% of OPAL’s capacity.

In light of these developments, it is hard to see the position being taken by Poland - and by those in solidarity with Warsaw over this matter (or who are clearly urging that country to embark on such initiatives) - as anything but a deliberate attempt to jeopardize Europe’s energy security in order to keep gas flowing through Ukraine, so as not to threaten the survival of the regime in Kiev that is close to bankruptcy and desperately in need of that revenue in order to survive. This political objective entirely trumps any rational economic considerations.

Poland has begun criticizing not only Russia and the European Commission but also Germany over the question of gas transit through Ukraine. The Polish online news site Biznes Alert has accused the German Federal Network Agency (Bundesnetzagentur) that manages the operation of gas pipelines of colluding with Gazprom and the German companies that «trade Russian gas that passes through OPAL».


Polish politicians and the media are not displaying much ingenuity in their attempts to claim that the sun is really the moon. However, if Gazprom’s export capacity and the real picture in Europe’s energy markets are being weighed on one side of the scale, while on the other side is the political flap over the question of gas shipments through Ukraine, European countries are unlikely to act against their own interests in order to back plans being made by Warsaw and its overseas handlers. After all, this could be a really harsh winter.


domingo, 25 de diciembre de 2016

Nueva tragedia aérea en Rusia


La navidad ha traído una nueva tragedia aérea para Rusia: la caída de un avión Tupolev con 92 pasajeros a bordo, incluyendo una mayoría de artistas que se dirigían al aeropuerto de Latakia, en Siria. La prensa occidental habla de accidente (ver la primera nota). Algunos, sin embargo, sugieren un sabotaje por parte de elementos ucranianos (segunda nota). Pronto lo sabremos. Las primeras reacciones oficiales sugieren, no obstante, un accidente o error de pilotaje (tercera nota).

La primera nota salió publicada hoy en el diario español El País:


Título: Un avión militar ruso con 92 personas a bordo se estrella en el mar Negro

Subtítulo: La aeronave perdió el contacto con los radares poco después de despegar del aeropuerto de Sochi

Texto: Un avión ruso Tupolev que había despegado esta madrugada de Moscú ha caído a las aguas del mar Negro poco después de haber hecho escala en el balneario de Sochi para echar combustible. La nave, un Tu-154 en la que viajaban 84 pasajeros más ocho tripulantes, se dirigía a Siria y debía aterrizar en la base aérea de Jmeimim, donde Rusia tiene una agrupación de aviones de guerra. El ministro de Defensa ruso, Sergei Shoigu, ha confirmado que no hay supervivientes. El presidente del país, Vladimir Putin, ha ordenado al primer ministro, Dimitri Medvedev, que abra y lidere una investigación para aclarar las causas del siniestro. Putin ha decretado para este lunes duelo nacional en memoria de las víctimas.

El avión se ha estrellado poco después de haber despegado desde Sochi, donde había realizado escala para dirigirse a la base rusa de Latakia, en Siria. La mayoría de los pasajeros, 64, eran artistas, integrantes del conjunto de canto y danza Alexándrov —conocido con el nombre de Coro del Ejército Ruso—, el resto eran militares y nueve periodistas, entre ellos del canal primer canal ruso, NTV y de la televisión Zvezdá (Estrella, canal militar) que iban a celebrar el Año Nuevo con las tropas.

A bordo se encontraban también dos funcionarios y la presidenta de la fundación Spravedlívaya Pomoshch (Ayuda Justa), Yelizabeta Glinka, más conocida como doctora Liza, que desde finales de los años 90 se ha dedicado a acciones humanitarias médicas tanto en el extranjero como en Rusia. Después de estallado el conflicto en el este de Ucrania, la doctora Liza logró sacar a decenas de niños enfermos. La doctora llevaba a Siria una partida de medicamentos.

El avión había desaparecido de los radares a las 7.25 hora local (dos menos en la España peninsular), poco después de despegar del aeropuerto de Sochi. Los restos del aparato han sido localizados cerca de las nueve en las aguas del mar Negro, a un kilómetro y medio de la costa.

El Ministerio de Defensa, al que pertenecía el Tu-154, ha informado de que los fragmentos del avión se encontraban a 50-70 metros de profundidad. De acuerdo con los análisis preliminares de los especialistas, la tragedia se produjo por un fallo técnico o un error del piloto. El jefe del comité de Defensa del Senado ruso, Víktor Ózerov, ha descartado la posibilidad de que el accidente pueda ser el resultado de un atentado terrorista.

La tripulación de la aeronave no dio ninguna señal de alarma, según la torre de control de Sochi, y la condiciones meteorológicas eran relativamente buenas, por lo que el mal tiempo no pudo haber motivado el accidente. Los pilotos eran experimentados y el aparato había pasado las revisiones técnicas correspondientes.

En cuanto a las posibles causas del siniestro, Dmitri Peskov, portavoz del Kremlin, se ha mostrado prudente y ha dicho que "es demasiado pronto" para hacer afirmaciones al respecto. A la zona de la caída del avión se han enviados equipos de rescate tanto en barcos como en helicópteros. Desde un primer momento, no hay indicios de que nadie haya sobrevivido y ya se han empezado a recuperar los cuerpos de las víctimas. Hay 63 buzos trabajando en la zona y en las próximas horas llegarán otros 50. "La zona del siniestro del avión Tu-154 ha quedado delimitada. No se han visto supervivientes", ha asegurado en un comunicado el ministro de Defensa.

Moscú generalmente envía grupos de artistas a Siria para actuar durante las fiestas ante los militares allí emplazados. En este caso el coro iba para la principal fiesta que celebran los rusos, la de Año Nuevo.

Los aviones Tu-154 han sufrido 15 accidentes con víctimas mortales desde 1990, entre ellos el ocurrido en abril de 2010 en el que se estrelló en los alrededores de Smolensk la nave presidencial polaca. Entre los muchos funcionarios polacos de alto rango que viajaban en ese vuelo y perecieron se encontraba el entonces presidente Lech Kaczynski con su esposa. En total, en accidentes de aviones Tu-154 han perecido más de 3.000 personas desde que en 1972 comenzó a explotarse comercialmente.




Por su parte, las primeras reflexiones del analista ruso conocido como “Saker”, del sitio web The Vineyard of the Saker, son las siguientes:


Título: The disaster of the Russian military Tu-154 – a few short first thoughts

Texto: It is too early to conclude what happened with this aircraft, but since I have been asked about this by email, here are my own, personal and provisional, thoughts:

Mechanical failure: unlikely.  The Tu-154 is a three engine aircraft and an extremely strong beast.  It’s safety record is comparable to most aircraft of its time, even though it was often used in extreme conditions other aircraft types did not have to operate in. The Tu-154 had already taken enough altitude to attempt a return to base or even a water landing.  The weather that day was good.  Besides, the crew did not communicate any problem.  Thus the disaster had to be instantaneous.

Fuel problem: unlikely.  Fuel problems are always a prime suspect when a crash occurs, but even if the engines had suddenly experienced problems or even a full shutdown, the pilots would have had the time to report this.  Also, like any other aircraft, the Tu-154 can glide and maneuver without power.

Bird strike: unlikely.  I am not even sure that there have ever been a triple engine failure due to a bird strike but even if there has been, they crew could have reported it which it did not.  And, again, the case of US Airways flight 1549 has shown that even a catastrophic birdstrike does not prevent a fully loaded airliner from attempting to land.

Pilot error: highly unlikely.  The guys flying this aircraft where extremely experienced and while human error is always possible, it mostly results in situation were it can be reported.  The Tu-154 was a very complex aircraft to operate and it had its weaknesses – but these were all very well known to the Russian crews and this crew was a very experienced one.

Missile: unlikely. The Tu-154 has three engines including one mounted over the top of the rear of the fuselage and a MANPAD type missile warhead does not have the kind of blast radius capable of taking out all three of them.  As for bigger missiles, the Black Sea coasts of Russia is very tightly controlled by the Russian military and security services (as is the entire Black Sea) and to get that close to the city of Sochi would be risky and difficult.

Sabotage/bomb: most likely simply because all other causes are even less likely.  True, this was a military aircraft with, supposedly, good security.  Alas, I can confirm from personal experience that if you look Russian and speak Russian like a native and if you act the right way, military security in Russia is nowhere near as good as it should be.  However, if you speak with an accent or look foreign, and that includes speaking with a Caucasian accent or looking like somebody from the Caucasus, you would have a much harder time beating the controls.

For all these reasons and even though it is way too early to speculate, my of preferred hypothesis is that it was a terrorist act executed by Ukrainian operatives.  I hope that I am wrong and that I will be proven wrong in the next 24 hours but at this point in time, this appears to me as the most likely scenario.


One more thing: this tragedy really breaks my heart.  Not only did the entire Alexandrov Ensemble perish, but two amazing personalities were on board: Valerii Khalikolv and “Dr Liza“.  There are no words to express the loss which the death of all these people represents for Russia.  This is why I hope and pray that in spite of why first reaction outlined above, this is not a Ukrainian terrorist attack because if it is, the consequences will be very severe.  We should know more very soon.


***

La cadena informativa rusa Sputnik, sin embargo, sugiere un fallo técnico o un error de pilotaje como causales más probables del accidente:


Título: Accidente aéreo de Tu-154 fue provocado por un fallo técnico o un error de pilotaje

Texto: El accidente del avión ruso Tu-154, desaparecido de los radares en Sochi, pudo haber sido provocado por un fallo técnico o un error de pilotaje, informó a RIA Novosti una fuente de las fuerzas del orden. "Entre las principales versiones de las causas de la catástrofe del avión Tu-154 figura el fallo técnico de la aeronave y un error de pilotaje", dijo el interlocutor de la agencia. © SPUTNIK/ A.POLIKASHIN Desaparece de radares un avión con 91 pasajeros en el sur de Rusia La fuente precisó que la mayoría de los pasajeros del avión son miembros del ensamble musical Alexándrov del Ministerio de Defensa ruso. Además en la aeronave se encontraban nueve periodistas de Canal 1 y la televisión Zvezda rusos. Según el servicio de prensa del Ministerio de Defensa, los músicos rusos viajaban a la base aérea de Hmeymim para felicitar a los militares con el Año Nuevo. Antes se informó que el avión con 91 personas a bordo desapareció de los radares poco después de despegar. Todos los servicios de emergencia de la región están participando en la búsqueda de la aeronave.



sábado, 24 de diciembre de 2016

Lo que somos


"Somos occidentales y cristianos, en el sentido de que no somos orientales y mahometanos", le dijo un amigo sabio a Astroboy hace ya muchos años. La frase es más profunda de lo que parece.

La imagen de arriba es de Jerusalén, lugar de encuentro, y desencuentro, de las tres religiones del Libro.

Tengan ustedes unas fiestas en paz.


viernes, 23 de diciembre de 2016

Lo que dejan las guerras del Imperio


Si estás preocupado por las últimas muecas de Massita ante las cámaras, o por las declaraciones de Mauricio sobre la felicidad del cangrejo, tomate un rato para ver estas imágenes. Vienen de Siria, el país donde en estos tiempos se decide el destino del mundo.

A continuación posteamos dos videos, protagonizados por dos chicas argentinas relacionadas con Siria de formas diversas. El primero es una nota periodística realizada por Diana Deglauy, cuyos padres son sirios emigrados a la Argentina hace varias décadas. Diana parece ser una chica moderna, progre y enamorada de la tierra de sus ancestros. Acá va: 

https://youtu.be/BQv6mYjjrb0


El segundo video es una conferencia dictada en España por la Hermana María Guadalupe Rodrigo, religiosa de la Orden del Verbo Encarnado, una institución sumamente reaccionaria con sede en Mendoza. La primera mitad de su charla habla específicamente de Siria, mientras que en la segunda mitad hace mayormente catequesis. Acá va el link:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPBf7UlUcXQ


Como siempre, te pueden gustar, te pueden no gustar. Tratamos de entender.


La nota que sigue es, obviamente, de Russia Today, y se relaciona con el primer video. Decimos "obviamente" porque, como se sabe, la prensa occidental está demasiado ocupada contando el drama de la rana azul de Costa Rica o las vicisitudes de la ardilla colicorta de Eslovaquia:


Siria: Volver a una tierra atravesada por el dolor

Epígrafe: Siria nunca volverá a ser la misma. La guerra y el terrorismo han reducido a escombros una nación antaño tranquila y feliz. Pero, ¿cuánto ha cambiado el país árabe? La corresponsal de RT Diana Deglauy, argentina de origen sirio, vuelve a la tierra de su familia para recordar y revivir los momentos de su infancia en una zona ahora devastada, y averiguar, a través de los relatos de su gente, el cruel presente del pueblo sirio.

Texto: La corresponsal de RT Diana Deglauy partió a Siria para mostrar cómo la guerra ha cambiado el país. No es su primer viaje a Siria. Deglauy es argentina, pero es hija de inmigrantes sirios. "Ir era en el fondo un regresar", admite ella. Constata que al recorrer sus paisajes se encontró con "una tierra atravesada por dolor". 


Volver para ayudar

"Volví porque es mi país, volví porque me importa. A mí no me gusta que el país que me dio mis valores y todo lo bueno esté enfermo. Es como mi madre, con la que me divertía cuando era chica", así explica Lama Nahhas, una trabajadora social siria, su decisión de volver a su país para ayudar a los que más lo necesitan, los niños. Nahhas vivía en Canadá cuando estalló la guerra.

"Toda nuestra vida se derrumbó, todo dio un vuelco. En estos 5 años hemos envejecido como si hubieran pasado 20. Todos estamos cansados", relata. "Si todos huimos, ¿a quien vamos a dejar nuestra patria?", se pregunta Nahhas. Por el lado positivo, remarca que "ahora hay muchas zonas seguras a pesar del conflicto".


Niños en la calle y sin escuela

No obstante, Deglauy anota que "Siria ya no es ni será la que algunos conocieron". Los menores que piden dinero en la calle son una novedad para el país árabe, algo totalmente inusual en Siria. Como también lo son los muchos niños que no saben ni leer ni escribir porque no van a la escuela. Cuando les preguntan, no suelen contar la verdad, ocultan sus nombres y sus historias dolorosas.

Otras miserias que afligen al pueblo sirio son la ausencia de un lugar donde vivir. Antes de la guerra, hasta la familia más humilde tenía un techo para vivir. Aún con un situación económica precaria, lograban desempeñar varios oficios, o armar una huerta para sembrar y cosechar alimentos. Actualmente, en el centro de Damasco se puede ver mucha gente durmiendo en la calle. Hasta hay niños de corta edad que duermen sin techo alguno.


"Infierno": dos años con los rebeldes

Deglauy se adentra en otro tema inquietante para el país: los rebeldes que luchaban contra el Gobierno de Bashar al Assad y que decían querer una revolución. 

"Una vez que los rebeldes dejan las armas, no se reconocen como tales. En su mayoría dicen que fueron obligados a luchar en contra de su país. Y en muchos casos es real. Muchos hombres fueron y son obligados a luchar contra el Ejército sirio", cuenta la corresponsal, que agrega que "la extorsión era la forma de captar soldados".

Mustafa fue uno de estos 'rebeldes'. Luchaba en sus filas en la ciudad de Daraya, al sudoeste de Damasco. Cuenta que cuando estaba de paseo en su último día de vacaciones, dos personas desconocidas se le acercaron y le pidieron sus papeles. Posteriormente, le amenazaron con la muerte si no se unía a su bando. "Somos el Ejército Libre sirio, o te quedas y luchas con nosotros o te matamos", recuerda Mustafa las palabras de los rebeldes. Dice que los rebeldes afirmaban que sus objetivos eran la yihad hasta la muerte y acabar con el Gobierno.

"Hablaban mucho con nosotros sobre la religión, nos persuadían. Al principio les creímos, después supimos que no eran más que unos ladrones", recalca Mustafa.

"Nos quitaban nuestras pertenencias si no hacíamos lo que querían. También necesitabamos dinero. Todo estaba muy caro. Los precios eran muy altos. El que no tenía dinero, moría de hambre. El que no iba a combatir con ellos, el que no luchaba en su bando, se moría del hambre", denuncia. 

"Me dijeron que tendría un sueldo mensual, que me iban a dar comida, un kaláshnikov y todo lo que necesitara", precisa el exrebelde sirio. "Fue un infierno", con estas palabras Mustafa resume sus dos años en las filas de los rebeldes.


Una lluvia de sangre provocada por los yihadistas

El siguiente punto de viaje de Deglauy es Homs, que se encuentra a solo dos horas por carretera de Damasco. Es la tercera ciudad más importante de Siria y hoy, según la periodista, se parece a "un cúmulo de escombos" sin vida. "En Homs no hay ruido. Su silencio es ensordecedor y la oscuridad da temor", relata ella. 

Una vez en la ciudad, Deglauy entrevista a Mohamed, un joven refugiado de Palmira que se aloja en una aula de un colegio de Homs protegido por el Ejército del Gobierno sirio tras lograr escapar de las garras del Estado Islámico.

Mohamed le cuenta la desgarradora experiencia de vivir en la ciudad controlada por los yihadistas: "Las calles estaban llenas de sangre. Como cuando llueve, pero en lugar de agua había sangre. No les costaba nada matar a una persona. Cuando mataban a alguien se reían y decían que era un mentiroso y un desertor y lo mataban sin piedad". 

"Los del Estado Islámico entraban en los hogares para asegurarse de que allí no se escondían los soldados sirios. Cuando encontraban a uno, asesinaban a toda la familia. Hubo matanzas. La gente tenía miedo porque a cualquiera que estuviese relacionado de alguna manera con el Estado o con el Ejército le arrancaban la cabeza", relata.


jueves, 22 de diciembre de 2016

Los que abren la boca para decir algo


Hablar claro y breve es algo a lo que Occidente no nos tiene precisamente acostumbrados. Basta escuchar la bizantina hora y media de idas y vueltas dialécticas de cualquier mequetrefe de alguna organización internacional, o a cualquier político con rango de Secretario para arriba agotando la paciencia del público para no decir absolutamente nada que valga la pena escuchar. Precisamente por eso sorprenden un poco las declaraciones de esta chica, Buzaina Shaaban (foto de arriba; asesora del presidente sirio Bashar al Assad), diciendo cortito lo que otros no se animarán a decir nunca. ¿No es cierto, Merkel, Steinmeier? Leemos en el sitio web Al Manar:


Título: Shaaban: La victoria de Alepo cambió el escenario sirio e internacional

Texto: Comentando la victoria del Ejercito sirio y sus aliados en la batalla de Alepo, Buzaina Shaaban, asesora política del presidente sirio Bashar al Assad, aseguró que esta victoria constituye “un giro esencial en esta guerra” y tendrá a buen seguro “repercusiones sobre el equilibrio de fuerzas a nivel regional e internacional”.

Se trata de una gran victoria, no sólo para la liberación de Siria sólo, sino también para el establecimiento de una coyuntura mundial en favor del combate contra el terrorismo y en favor de los pueblos que luchan por su soberanía, el futuro de sus países y su capacidad de tomar decisiones de forma independiente”, afirmó Shaaban durante una entrevista exclusiva para el sitio de Al Manar.

A la luz de la victoria de Alepo, el equilibrio de fueras va a cambiar y el mundo se va a convertir en multipolar. Lo que EEUU no quiere comprender es que Rusia, China y sus aliados son aquellos que dictan ahora el juego en el escenario internacional y no EEUU y Occidente”.

Tanto Siria como Irán y el eje de la Resistencia van a decidir el futuro de la región y no aquellos que vinieron a la región para destruirla”, añadió.

Refiriéndose a las consecuencias, Shaaban juzgó que la victoria de Alepo permitirá acelerar el arreglo político. “Dado que Occidente apostó por terroristas que están ahora vencidos, deberá necesariamente realizar concesiones políticas. Va a negociar con Rusia y sus aliados y participar en el arreglo político de una forma diferente a lo que ocurrió en el pasado”.

Ella señaló que en el Consejo de Seguridad, Occidente ha apoyado ostensiblemente a los terroristas. “No hay terroristas sin apoyo exterior”, señaló la consejera siria.

miércoles, 21 de diciembre de 2016

Navidades en Alepo


Pocos, en Occidente, van a comprender estas escenas. Júbilo entre las ruinas de Alepo. Lágrimas de Siria, lágrimas de un pueblo.

Siria entra en su séptimo año de "guerra civil". Más que nada, una invasión del Imperio, la NATO y las monarquías pleistocénicas del Golfo, apoyando a decenas de miles de fanáticos, sobre todo externos, generando así la demolición casi íntegra de un país y la peor catástrofe humanitaria desde la postguerra.

Al Gran Pueblo Sirio, salud.


https://youtu.be/rYiJF5OCgFQ



Preocupaciones


Hay signos de preocupación en las entrañas del Imperio y su brazo armado, la NATO: están quedando afuera de negociaciones relevantes en Medio Oriente y, tal vez, en muchos otros sitios (como lo dijimos en nuestro post de ayer sobre el tema). Muchos se preguntan si el asesinato del embajador ruso en Ankara no se vincula con este hecho; algunos lo hacen abiertamente. La nota que sigue es de Scott Humor and Baaz para el sitio web The Vineyard of the Saker:


Título: Death of Geneva format, new format for the Syrian conflict resolution, facts in the murder of Russia’s Ambassador

Subtítulos: Russia, Iran, Turkey: countries who are deciding the future of Syria. New format for resolving the Syrian conflict has been established on Tuesday / The US has been pushed out of the Middle East and has lost most of its influence despite of its military presence in Iraq

Texto: Ankara took the role of the mediator with the “opposition”  per the Russian government’s request. This completely puts Washington and the EU format out of business. On December 16, the president of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev issued a statement: 

The Russian and Turkish leaders expressed interest in holding peace negotiations in Astana of the conflicting parties in Syria. Nursultan Nazarbayev supported that initiative and announced his preparedness to provide a platform for such talks in the Kazakh capital.”

The US State Department spokesperson John Kirby during his daily press briefing on December 20th stated that also the US wasn’t a party to the talks on Syria the Secretary of State’s John Kerry was briefed by the Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and by the Foreign Minister of Turkey,  there also was a press briefing after the meeting which the US was allowed to attend.

Listen to the first ten minutes of the Kirby trying to calm down the hysterical American journalists who were asking him if the US has lost its influence around the world [En realidad, son los primeros 25 minutos]. He tried to smooth it out and downplayed the simple fact that the US has become irrelevant in the Middle East, despite of its military and secret services operations there.

“The secretary doesn’t see this as a snub at all. He sees it as another multilateral effort to try to get a lasting peace in Syria and he welcomes any progress towards that.”

We would obviously refute any notion that … the fact that we weren’t at this one meeting is somehow a harbinger or a litmus test for U.S. influence and leadership there or anywhere else around the world.” (...) We are not excluded, we are not being sidelined.”

Normally, I wouldn’t post the State department press briefing video, but this one is just too good to miss:

https://youtu.be/GQ4DHnApCQw

During the meetings on Tuesday  the Moscow Declaration to end the Syrian War was adopted without any presence of the US. Russia, Turkey & Iran stated that they are ready to be guarantors in resolving Syrian crisis – Russian defense minister.

It’s clearly reflects Russia’s growing links with Iran and Turkey, despite of the attempt to undermine the process by murdering  on Monday the Russia’s ambassador to Turkey.

At this point, the terror attacks on Russia and its allies before major diplomatic events have become routine.  However, instead of sidelining those events, these terror attacks bring the major powers in Eurasia, Russia, China, Iran, Turkey, Syria, Kazakhstan, India and everyone else together. Essentially we see in real time how terror attacks serve as catalysis to speed up the process of unification of Eurasia in the process of pushing the US and EU out of the continent, and curbing Israel’s and Saudis’ lust for blood in the region.

Like a wounded monster, the US tries to bring as much harm to Russia as it can. On December 20, Washington announced more political and economic sanctions of Russia this time on gas producer Novatek. Also on the list Crimean Ports, Crimean Railways, Stroiproekt Institute, Transflot, and two vessels bearing the Russian flag “Marshal Zhukov” and “Stalingrad.”  Also more sanctions are imposed on the Glavgosexpertiza Rossii, the leading Russian institution dealing with expert reviews of design documents and findings of engineering surveys.

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov made a statement saying that:

We will be expanding our lists, we will see how we can respond asymmetrically. We reserve the right to choose the timing, the venue and form of counter-moves the way that will suit us, and the way it will be relevant to our own priorities in the American direction.”


Some new facts in the murder of the Russian Ambassador

Russia’s Investigative Committee has opened a criminal case on this assassination. A working group went to Ankara to take part in the probe into this crime together with the Turkish investigation.

President Putin said that “Karlov died as a soldier. He was an illustrious diplomat, enjoying a very good reputation in the country of his mission, he had good relations with the leadership of Turkey as well as with other political forces that respected him.”

On December 20th, Ergodan confirmed that a joint team has started probing into Russian ambassador’s murder

One of the Turkey’s pro-government daily Yeni Safak had published materials that points at the CIA being behind the assassination of Russian ambassador.

Hamza Sulyman, a retired Syrian army sniper tweeted some interesting photos:

During the Moscow meeting bodyguard of the Iranian Foreign Minister watching the bodyguard of the Turkish Foreign Minister

Don’t say that he had too many beers.

Peskov disclosed a bit of information on the Russian investigative group. It includes eighteen officers of special services, doctors and psychiatrists. They have been in Turkey from the second part of Tuesday.

The Russian Ambassador, as we know, had no Russian security detail. In essence, Russian security has not being allowed to operate and to carry arms outside of the mission according to the international practices, it’s the hosting country responsibility to provide the security for the foreign diplomats.

After being wounded, the Ambassador was without medical attention for 25 minutes.

A week ago, the assassin took part in the  “protection” of the Russian Embassy, when an anti-Russian meeting in the protest against the liberation of Aleppo was organized near the mission’ building.

The shooting occurred at the Contemporary Arts Gallery in Ankara’s central Cankaya district,  the Turkish state-run media agency.

On the day of the attack, the assassin stayed in a hotel near the art center. 

While Altintas was not on duty, he used his police identification badge to enter the gallery with a gun, per Hurriyet Daily News.

The metal detectors were used at the entrance to the gallery, but there was no increased security because of the ambassador’s presence.

This attack is a provocation aimed at disrupting our relations. I condemn it vehemently.” Erdogan

Altintas has not been tied to any Islamic terror organizations, on the contrary there are facts pointing that he was a part of the pro-Washington anti-government putsch, and that he was working  with the US and Israel intelligence.

Mert Altintas was later killed during a gunfight with security forces, authorities told Anadolu, the Turkish state-run media agency. The operation to stop Altintas was led by special forces, Anadolu reports. He was shot about 15 minutes after the initial attack.

Russia’s intelligence expressed the dissatisfaction that he was killed, instead of being taken alive.

There are witness accounts, don’t know how credible, saying that he was surrendering when he was killed.

Someone pointed out the terrorist’s last name was Altintas, that could be translated as “gold stone” or Goldstein. Also, there was information that Altintas was actively involved with Turkish neo-liberal organizations in the US like “Young Turks.”

In November the Duran posted the following: “To watching the entire Young Turks team meltdown live on air as they insult all of America, call people “f***in dumb”, and then go on a bizarre rant threatening the DNC with all out war.”

On December 19th, in the wake of assassination President Putin had an emergency meeting with the Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, the head of foreign intelligence services Sergei Naryshkin  and Alexander Bortnikov, the Director of the FSB.

We have to know who gave orders to the assassin.” said Putin


FM Lavrov speaks on assassinated ambassador to Turkey

The spokesperson for the Russian Foreign Ministry said that the Russia’s Ambassador Andrei Karlov was working to establish contacts with the Syrian opposition. He was talking to all sides of the Syrian conflict and was facilitating the dialogue between Syrian government and the opposition. “Consider this, this tragedy takes a completely new dimension.”

Apparently, Karlov’s work with the Syrian opposition somehow was leaked out to the West. On December 1, 2016 the Financial Times reported that  Syrian rebels in secret talks with Moscow to end Aleppo fighting. “Turkey-facilitated negotiations without US show how Washington could become sidelined

The way Erica Solomon phrases it for FT makes Kirby’s statements that the US only wants peace in the region regardless of an authorship of this peace sound like bold-faced lie. This also completely debasing one of the all time favorite Washington’s meme that Russia wants to destroy the “democratic Syrian opposition.”

Syrian rebels are in secret talks with Russia to end the fighting in Aleppo, according to opposition figures, a development that shows how the US could become sidelined in some of the Middle East’s most pivotal conflicts.”

The Russians and Turks are talking without the US now. It [Washington] is completely shut out of these talks, and doesn’t even know what’s going on in Ankara,” said one opposition figure, who asked not to be identified.”

This kind of situation couldn’t be tolerated by the Obama’s regime. No wonder that according to the Russia’s officials an assassination of the Ambassador was carried out by the CIA.

I also want to use this SITREP to address a couple of issues that I believe are being misunderstood  in terms of Russia and Turkey relations.

Turkey has a powerful and very active pro-Washington, pro-Israel and pro-EU opposition. On the top of this, Turkey is heavily infected with NATO and other foreign intelligence operatives, including those who operate as jihadists. The 5th columnists, accompanied by the motley crew of murderers for hire are doing everything, including the demolition of the Turkish economy and the assassination attempts on  Erdogan. Those who scream that Russia has to instantly cut all the relations with ”Turkey the Backstabber” are only helping those neo-liberal interests.

Frankly, if Russia would cut the diplomatic ties with Turkey today, tomorrow every Russian ambassador would be killed in every country. We are in the middle of the 1st in 21st century the American and European war on Russia. Only, unable to burn Russian villages with people, and to hang Russian women and children on town squares, democrats take down the Russian passenger plane and kill the Russian Ambassador.  We have been dealing with this sustained hatred of Europeans towards Russians for centuries. When it comes to the emotional competency,  the long-term hatred is delegated to those parts of human brain that deals with the most  primitive skills. For me, this is representative of any average European.

In the US, the large part of the population doesn’t have this hatred and wants to have better relations with Russia, but until recently these people had no voice. The majority of those who have the political power and the media are those with the Brutish, Eastern European, and Israeli roots.

Long story short, the last war with Turkey was over 100 years ago, while we had two major wars with Europe in between. Turkey didn’t attack the Soviet Union during the last Europe’s war on Russia, despite  of the Germany’s insistence and the covert British terror attacks on the Turks. Sounds familiar, right?

So, we were able to sustain good relations with Turkey. It’s our ally in the Middle East now, and it has its own very important mission. Only with Turkey, Russia and Iran can lock Europeans and Americans out of the ME, lock Israel and Saudis in, and with this to stabilize the region.

Turkey is developing better relations with the Syrian government, with Iran, and even with China, despite of some bitter terror problems. Ergodan is now our guy. He is very smart, he is a patriot, and he wants what the best for his country. He has understood recently that Turkey will be peaceful and prosperous only as a part of the greater Eurasian union.

About Turkish troops in Northern Syria. Turks entered Syria per agreement between them, Russia, Iran and Syrian governments. The issue is very transparent. The US, Israel and EU want to divide Syria, and to create the Northern Syrian land corridor called Kurdistan. Washington was looking to have a complete control over this puppet territory, to control oil and gas routes to Europe, and to set up dry land routes for the military to move closer to the Iran’s, Russia’s, Afghanistan’s, Kazakhstan’s, China’s  borders. This corridor would give the Western allies power to interrupt the trade routes, including the Silk Road and the North-South corridor from Russia to India via Iran.

If the north of Syria would be made into a land corridor and was occupied by the Western allies this would eventfully bring the complete devastation to the entire Eurasia, not just the Middle East. One after another nations that are still standing would be pushed back into stone age. Kurds, as the agents provocateurs,  had already played their parts in the devastation of Iraq and Syria. It was them who went to the UN and cried crocodile tears and demanded the “international community” to punish Saddam for some made up crimes against them. See how Egypt just arrested a group producing videos of “injured children of Aleppo” with fake blood and teddy bears, just to get a glimpse into the industrial production of fake video evidences of nonexistent war crimes.

For the past two centuries, the Kurdish elite has been serving the British crown, and with the same passion and devotion they have laid themselves under Washington.

I have to admit that there are healthy groups of Kurds who want to cooperate with the Syrian and Turkish governments, and who just want to be the normal citizens of their countries.

Those, however, who dream the impossible dream that Washington would create for them a heaven on earth, end up terrorizing Turkey with at least 300 people killed and over thousand of injured, in a course of one year. They have turned a prosperous, peaceful, tourist oriented country into a terror hellhole.

Knowing all these and more, the Syrian government could not start fighting with the Syrian Kurds for obvious reasons, since they are citizens and fight with the ISIS. Russia and Iran couldn’t do anything either. The only other country that has the legitimate reason to use military force to bring Kurds to heel is Turkey. That’s why the Turkish troops are in Syria. They are acting as place-holders  to make sure that the Western troops can’t get there.

The featured image: Russia is lacing up combat boots.


martes, 20 de diciembre de 2016

Diana y los llorones


En este blog hemos posteado varias notas de Diana Johnstone (foto), una progresista sin taras políticamente correctas ni pelos en la lengua a la hora de señalar las idioteces de la izquierda. La nota que sigue, publicada en Counterpunch, aborda el tema de las bandas de llorones y malos perdedores que llenan calles y campuses pidiendo la cabeza del presidente electo, Donald Trump. (Dicho sea de paso, a esta altura casi nos cae simpático el Donaldo, mirá lo que te digo). Pasemos a la nota:


Título: Unable to face reality: Hillary's sore losers

Texto: If the 2016 presidential campaign was a national disgrace, the reaction of the losers is an even more disgraceful spectacle. It seems that the political machine backing Hillary Clinton can't stand losing an election.


And why is that?

Because they are determined to impose "exceptional" America's hegemony on the entire world, using military-backed regime changes, and Donald Trump seems poised to spoil their plans. The entire Western establishment, roughly composed of neoconservative ideologues, liberal interventionists, financial powers, NATO, mainstream media and politicians in both the United States and Western Europe, committed to remaking the Middle East to suit Israel and Saudi Arabia and to shattering impertinent Russia, have been thrown into an hysterical panic at the prospect of their joint globalization project being sabotaged by in ignorant intruder.

Donald Trump's expressed desire to improve relations with Russia throws a monkey wrench into the plans endorsed by Hillary Clinton to "make Russia pay" for its bad attitude in the Middle East and elsewhere. If he should do what he has promised, this could be a serious blow to the aggressive NATO buildup on Russia's European borders, not to mention serious losses to the U.S. arms industry planning to sell billions of dollars worth of superfluous weapons to NATO allies on the pretext of the "Russian threat".

The war party's fears may be exaggerated, inasmuch as Trump's appointments indicate that the United States' claim to be the "exceptional", indispensable nation will probably survive the changes in top personnel. But the emphasis may be different. And those accustomed to absolute rule cannot tolerate the challenge.


Bad Losers On the Top

Members of the U.S. Congress, the mainstream media, the CIA and even President Obama have made fools of themselves and the nation by claiming that the Clintonite cabal lost because of Vladimir Putin. Insofar as the rest of the world takes this whining seriously, it should further increase Putin's already considerable prestige. If true, the notion that Moscovite hacking could defeat the favorite candidate of the entire U.S. power establishment can only mean that the United States' political structure is so fragile that a few disclosed emails can cause its collapse. A government notorious for snooping into everybody's private communication, as well as for overthrowing one government after another by less subtle means, and whose agents boasted of scaring the Russians into re-elected the abysmally unpopular Boris Yeltsin in 1996, now seems to be crying pathetically, "Mommy, Vlady is playing with my hacking toys!"

Of course, Russians would quite naturally prefer a U.S. president who openly shies away from the possibility of starting a nuclear war with Russia. That doesn't make Russia "an enemy", it is just a sign of good sense. Nor does it mean that Putin is so naïve as to imagine that Moscow could throw the election by a few dirty tricks. The current Russian leaders, unlike their Washington counterparts, tend to take a longer view, rather than imagining that the course of history can be changed by a banana peel.

This whole miserable spectacle is nothing but a continuation of the Russophobia exploited by Hillary Clinton to distract from her own multiple scandals. As the worst loser in American electoral history, she must blame Russia, rather than recognize that there were multiple reasons to vote against her.

The propaganda machine has found a response to unwelcome news: it must be fake. The Washington conspiracy theorists are outdoing themselves this time. The Russian geeks supposedly knew that by revealing a few Democratic National Committee internal messages, they could ensure the election of Donald Trump. What tremendous prescience!

Obama promises retaliation against Russia for treating the United States the way the United States treats, well, Honduras (and even Russia itself until blocked by Putin). Putin retorted that so far as he knew, the United States was not a banana republic, but a great power able to protect its elections. Washington is loudly denying that. The same mainstream media who brought you Saddam's "weapons of mass destruction" are now bringing you this preposterous conspiracy theory with straight faces.

When intelligence agencies become aware of the activities of rival intelligence agencies, they usually keep the knowledge to themselves, as part of the mutual spook game. Going public with this wild tale shows that the whole point is to persuade the American public that Trump's election is illegitimate, in the hope of defeating him in the electoral college or, if that fails, of crippling his presidency by labeling him a "Putin stooge".


Bad Losers On the Bottom

At least the bad losers on the top know what they are doing and have a purpose. The bad losers on the bottom are expressing emotions without clear objectives. It is false self-dramatization to call for "Resistance" as if the country had been invaded by extraterrestrials. The U.S. electoral system is outmoded and bizarre, but Trump played the game by the rules. He campaigned to win swing States, not a popular majority, and that's what he got.

The problem isn't Trump but a political system which reduces the people's choice to two hated candidates, backed by big bucks.

Whatever they think or feel, the largely youthful anti-Trump protesters in the streets create an image of hedonistic consumer society's spoiled brats who throw tantrums when they don't get what they want. Of course, some are genuinely concerned about friends who are illegal immigrants and fear deportation. It is quite possible to organize in their defense. The protesters may be mostly disappointed Bernie Sanders supporters, but whether they like it or not, their protests amount to a continuation of the dominant themes in Hillary Clinton's negative campaign. She ran on fear. In the absence of any economic program to respond to the needs of millions of voters who showed their preference for Sanders, and of those who turned to Trump simply because of his vague promise to create jobs, her campaign exaggerated the portent of Trump's most politically incorrect statements, creating the illusion that Trump was a violent racist whose only program was to arouse hatred. Still worse, Hillary stigmatized millions of voters as "a basket of deplorables, racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic — you name it." These remarks were made to an LGBT rally, as part of her identity politics campaign to win over a clientele of minorities by stigmatizing the dwindling white majority. The identity politics premise is that ethnic and sexual minorities are oppressed and thus morally superior to the white majority, which is the implied oppressor. It is this tendency to sort people into morally distinct categories that divides Americans against each other, every bit as much - or more - than Trump's hyperbole about Mexican or Islamic immigrants. It has served to convince many devotees of political correctness to regard white working class Americans in the "fly-over" regions as enemy invaders who threaten to send them all to concentration camps.

Terrified of what Trump may do, his opponents tend to ignore what the lame ducks are actually doing. The last gasp Clintonite campaign to blame Hillary's defeat on "fake news", supposedly inspired by The Enemy, Russia, is a facet of the growing drive to censor the Internet - previously for child pornography, or for anti-Semitism, and next on the pretext of combating "fake news", meaning whatever goes contrary to the official line. This threat to freedom of expression is more sinister than eleven-year-old locker-room macho boasts by Trump.

There will and should be strong political opposition to whatever reactionary domestic policies are adopted by the Trump administration. But such opposition should define the issues and work for specific goals, instead of expressing a global rejection that is non-functional.

The hysterical anti-Trump reaction is unable to grasp the implications of the campaign to blame Hillary's defeat on Putin. Do the kids in the street really want war with Russia? I doubt it. But they do not perceive that for all its glaring faults, the Trump presidency provides an opportunity to avoid war with Russia. This is a window of opportunity than will be slammed shut if the Clintonite establishment and the War Party get their way. Whether they realize it or not, the street protesters are helping that establishment delegitimatize Trump and sabotage the one positive element in his program: peace with Russia.


Adjustments in the Enemy List

By its fatally flawed choices in the Middle East and in Ukraine, the United States foreign policy establishment has driven itself into a collision course with Russia. Unable to admit that the United States backed the wrong horse in Syria, the War Party sees no choice but to demonize and "punish" Russia, with the risk of dipping into the Pentagon's vast arsenal of argument-winning nuclear weapons. Anti-Russian propaganda has reached extremes exceeding those of the Cold War. What can put an end to this madness? What can serve to create normal attitudes and relations concerning that proud nation which aspires primarily simply to be respected and to promote old-fashioned international law based on national sovereignty? How can the United States make peace with Russia?

It is clear that in capitalist, chauvinist America there is no prospect of shifting to a peace policy by putting David Swanson in charge of U.S. foreign relations, however desirable that might be.

Realistically, the only way that capitalist America can make peace with Russia is through capitalist business. And that is what Trump proposes to do.

A bit of realism helps when dealing with reality. The choice of Exxon CEO Rex W. Tillerson as Secretary of State is the best step toward ending the current race toward war with Russia. "Make money not war" is the pragmatic American slogan for peace at this stage.

But the "resistance" to Trump is not likely to show support for this pragmatic peace policy. It is already encountering opposition in the war-loving Congress. Instead, by shouting "Trump is not my President!" the disoriented leftists are inadvertently strengthening that opposition, which is worse than Trump.

Avoiding war with Russia will not transform Washington into a haven of sweetness and light. Trump is an aggressive personality, and the opportunistic aggressive personalities of the establishment, notably his pro-Israel friends, will help him turn U.S. aggression in other directions. Trump's attachment to Israel is nothing new, but appears to be particularly uncompromising. In that context, Trump's extremely harsh words for Iran are ominous, and one must hope that his stated rejection of "regime change" war applies in that case as well as others. Trump's anti-China rhetoric also sounds bad, but in the long run there is little he or the United States can do to prevent China from becoming once again the "indispensable nation" it used to be during most of its long history. Tougher trade deals will not lead to the Apocalypse.


The Failure of the Intellectual Establishment

The sad image today of Americans as bad losers, unable to face reality, must be attributed in part to the ethical failure of the so-called 1968 generation of intellectuals. In a democratic society, the first duty of men and women with the time, inclination and capacity to study reality seriously is to share their knowledge and understanding with people who lack those privileges. The generation of academics whose political consciousness was temporarily raised by the tragedy of the Vietnam war should have realized that their duty was to use their position to educate the American people, notably about the world that Washington proposed to redesign and its history. However, the new phase of hedonistic capitalism offered the greatest opportunities for intellectuals in manipulating the masses rather than educating them. The consumer society marketing even invented a new phase of identity politics, with the youth market, the gay market, and so on. In the universities, a critical mass of "progressive" academics retreated into the abstract world of post-modernism, and have ended up focusing the attention of youth on how to react to other people's sex lives or "gender identification". Such esoteric stuff feeds the publish or perish syndrome and prevents academics in the humanities from having to teach anything that might be deemed critical of U.S. military spending or its failing efforts to assert its eternal domination of the globalized world. The worst controversy coming out of academia concerns who should use which toilet.


If the intellectual snobs on the coasts can sneer with such self-satisfaction at the poor "deplorables" in flyover land, it is because they themselves have ignored their primary social duty of seeking truth and sharing it. Scolding people for their "wrong" attitudes while setting the social example of unrestrained personal promotion can only produce the anti-elite reaction called "populism". Trump is the revenge of people who feel manipulated, forgotten and despised. However flawed, he is the only choice they had to express their revolt in a rotten election. The United States is deeply divided ideologically, as well as economically. The United States is threatened, not by Russia, but by its own internal divisions and the inability of Americans not only to understand the world, but even to understand each other.


Rusia, Irán y Turquía, garantes de una solución política para Oriente Medio


El asesinato del embajador ruso en Turquía no parece haber producido el efecto deseado por sus asesinos. Rusos, turcos e iraníes están redactando un documento, en estas horas,  proponiéndose a sí mismos como garantes de una solución política para Siria y, por extensión, para todo el Oriente Medio. El Imperio y su brazo armado, la NATO, quedan afuera de este acuerdo. Será interesante leer el texto resultante.

La figura de arriba muestra a un grupo de "rebeldes" junto a civiles sirios esperando ser evacuados de un sector del este de Alepo, hace dos días. Leemos en Russia Today:


Título: Russia, Turkey & Iran ready to be guarantors in resolving Syrian crisis – Russian defense minister

Texto: A text of the Moscow declaration on immediate steps in resolving the Syrian crisis is being prepared. Moscow, Ankara and Tehran are ready to be guarantors of its implementation, Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu said.

Today experts are working on the text of the Moscow declaration on immediate steps toward resolving the Syrian crisis. This is a thorough, extremely necessary document,” Shoigu said at the meeting with his Iranian counterpart Hossein Dehghan.

According to Shoigu, all previous “attempts to agree on joint efforts undertaken by the US or their partners were doomed.”

None of them exerted real influence on the situation on the ground,” he said.

The approval of the declaration at the level of defense and foreign ministers shows a willingness to “act as guarantors and jointly resolve the urgent issues of the Syrian crisis,” Shoigu said.

That’s why we support the adoption of this declaration,” he added.

Shoigu also met with the minister of National Defense of Turkey, Fikri Isik, who praised the operation on liberating eastern Aleppo.

Now we are observing a very successful operation to liberate eastern Aleppo from fighters, the evacuation of the families of the opposition from Aleppo,” Isik said.

Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavusoglu, who is currently in Moscow for talks with Russia’s Sergey Lavrov and Iran’s Mohammad Javad Zarif, said that the trilateral cooperation has proven its effectiveness in eastern Aleppo and called for it to spread to other parts of Syria.

A political solution is the best solution, this is what we believe,” Çavusoglu said.

He added that the ceasefire should be implements in all parts of Syria, adding that the truce doesn’t concern Islamic State or Jabhat Fateh al-Sham (formerly known as Al-Nusra Front). 

Zarif said that Russia, Turkey and Iran should cooperate “to end terrorism which is holding hostage everyone in Syria and in the Middle East.”

Terrorism can’t be an instrument even for short-term political goals because it is a threat and we need to battle it,” he said.

Cui bono


La nota que posteamos a continuación analiza los hechos de ayer en Ankara a partir de la clásica pregunta: Cui bono? ¿Quén se beneficia? (con el asesinato del embajador ruso en Turquía). Intenta contestar la pregunta el analista ruso conocido como El Peregrino, en su blog The Vineyard of the Saker:


Título: A few initial short thoughts on the murder of the Russian Ambassador to Ankara

Texto: Okay, so tonight we have the name of the assassin, it is Mevlut Mert Aydintas, a 22 year old policeman who had been recently fired following the anti-Gulenist crackdown of Erdogan against the forces which had attempted to overthrow him recently. We also have a very useful video of the murder.

That video of the attack also shows something very important: the only shots fired are those fired by the assassin. See for yourself:

https://youtu.be/-KZMPsZjZLE

What this means is one of two things:

Version 1: there was nobody in charge of security at this exhibition

Version 2: the room where this murder happened was considered ‘safe/sterile’ because it was inside an outer security perimeter which we don’t see in this video.

I find version 2 far more likely.  That would also explain why and how Mevlut Mert Aydintas so easily got it: he simply flashed his police ID and was let through.

When such an event occurs it is also important to ask cui bono – whom does it benefit?


Erdogan? No

I see absolutely no imaginable reason why Erdogan would want the Russian Ambassador murdered in Ankara, but I can easily imagine a long list of reasons why he would not want that to happen at all.  Some will correctly say that the fall of Aleppo is a humiliating defeat for Turkey and Erdogan, and I agree.  But I would remind everybody that Erdogan clearly had a deal going with the Russians and the Iranians when he moved his forces across the border and occupied northern Syria.  There is *no way* he would have risked such a move against the will of Moscow and Tehran.  So what was this deal?  We will probably never know, but it clearly included a provision which limited Turkey’s actions to a narrow strip in the north.  If that hypothesis is correct, then Aleppo would have to be considered outside the “Turkish sphere of interest” in Syria, at least by the tripartite Turkish-Iranian-Russian understanding.  Did Erdogan know that Aleppo would fall and would fall so fast?  Probably not.  It appears that Erdogan got outmaneuvered by the Russians and the Iranians.  But he most definitely had better options to retaliate against the liberation of Aleppo than to have the Russian Ambassador murdered in Ankara.  The fact is that the Turks did precious little when Aleppo was liberated, at most they helped the Russian evacuate part of the “good terrorists”.

Even if Erdogan is a lunatic, he is smart enough to understand that if he has the Russian Ambassador murdered in Ankara NATO will do nothing to protect him and that the Russians can fire a cruise missile right into his bedroom window.  Erdogan might be crazy, but he is clearly not *that* crazy.

Finally, let’s remember the disastrous consequences for Turkey following the shooting down of the Russian SU-24 and the fact that, by numerous corroborated accounts, the Russian intelligences services saved Erdogan, probably literally, by warning him of the coup against him.

So, for all these reasons, Erdogan is not on my current list of suspects.  Never say never, new facts might come to light, especially with a maniac like Erdogan, but right now I will assume that he has nothing to do with what happened.


Daesh & Co?  Maybe

Well, it is rather obvious that the Daesh & Co. had an extremely long list of reasons to want to kill a high profile Russian official.  So yes, they sure had the motive.  Considering how successful radical Islamist extremists have been at penetrating the Turkish deep (and not so deep) state, Daesh and Co. also had the means.  As for the opportunity, the video above clearly shows that not only did Mevlut Mert Aydintas have the time to shoot the Russian Ambassador many times (I counted 9 shots), but after that he still had the time to just stand there and scream all sorts of slogans about Syria, Aleppo and God.  While we don’t know all the details yet, this is already very strong evidence that security at this event was dismal.


Gulen, the CIA, Obama & Co?  Maybe

Yes, they are also on my list of suspects.  The Gulenists have nothing to lose, the CIA has gone crazy with anger and fear at the election of Trump, and the Obama Administration is full of angry, offended, deeply vindicative and otherwise plain nasty characters who would love to trigger a new crisis between Russia and Turkey or make the Russian pay in some way for humiliating the AngloZionist Empire in Aleppo.  Keep in mind that this is exactly how the CIA always kills foreign dignitaries: by subcontracting the murder to a local fanatic so as to preserve what they call “plausible deniability”.

During the Cold War the Soviets and the Americans had an unwritten understanding that “we don’t kill each other”.  It was never formally mentioned or otherwise acknowledged, but I assure you that it was real: neither side wanted an open ended escalation of assassinations and counter-assassinations.  But today’s CIA is a pathetic joke compared to the CIA of the Cold War, and with hodge-podge of mediocre dimwits now in the Executive branch I would not put it past some idiot in Langley to approve of the murder of a Russian Ambassador.  Besides, if the Americans were crazy and reckless enough to attempt to overthrow Erdogan, why would they not try to murder a Russian Ambassador?


What about the lone gunman hypothesis?

Well, it is impossible to prove a negative. Mevlut Mert Aydintas did lose his job in a recent purge, he did have police credentials and his actions on the video seem to be a textbook example of the kind of fanatical behavior a lone nutcase would display.  So yes, it is possible that Mevlut Mert Aydintas acted alone.  After all, all he needed was a gun and a police ID.  Let’s see what the Turks, and the Russians, find out about him.  Still, I doubt it.  That kind of personality is usually identified by state sponsoring terrorism and then activated when needed.  My gut tells me that he did not just act alone.  Somebody probably used Mevlut Mert Aydintas.


Painful questions

Here I really hope that I am wrong, but if I want to be honest I have to admit that I am completely unable to find an excuse of the lax security around Ambassador Andrey Karlov.  And I am not referring to the Turks here, I am referring to the Russian security services.  Here is why.

Even if we assume that the Turks had told the Russians that they had established a ‘safe/sterile’ perimeter around the exhibit and that the general public would not be let in, the footage shows what appears to be only a few guests, there is no excuse for the Russian not to have at least one bodyguard in the immediate proximity to the Ambassador.  Turkey is not only a country at war, but Russia is a party to that war, the Takfiris have made a very long list of threats against Russia and, finally, Turkey is a country which has suffered from terrorism for years and which has just suffered a bloody attempted coup. In a country like that a top official like an Ambassador should have been protected by an entire group of bodyguards, but in this case there was clearly nobody.  Oh sure, the Russian can blame the Turks for having set up a crappy perimeter, but as professionals they should know that the Turks are already having extreme difficulties in dealing with their own terrorists and that following the massive purges the security services are in a state of chaos.  Would one bodyguard have made a difference?

Yes, possibly.  Probably in fact.

From the video it appears that Mevlut Mert Aydintas was standing about 5 meter behind Ambassador Karlov when he opened fire.  Apparently, not a single of the shots hit the Ambassador’s head.  If Ambassador Karlov had been wearing a flack jacket or any other type of body armor he would have probably survived that first volley of bullets (unless one hit the cervicals).  One single bodyguard could then have easily killed Mevlut Mert Aydintas and evacuated the ambassador to safety.  Evidently Karlov was not wearing any kind of body armor that day.  Why?  He did not have a single bodyguard next to him.  Why?  No Russian voices are heard on the video, so there appears to have been no Russian security anywhere near the ambassador.  Why?

Normally, ambassadors are a very easy target.  Everybody knows them, their routine is public and, contrary to what many seem to think, most of them have no security detail.  I am absolutely amazed that more ambassadors are not killed regularly.  In high risk countries, however, ambassadors are normally protected, especially ambassadors representing countries involved in a war or who are likely targets of terrorist attacks. True, as a rule, the Russians, including diplomats, tend to be more brave/reckless (pick the term) than their western counterparts: they don’t scare easy and they like to show that they are not afraid.  But that kind of attitude needs to be kept in check by professionals.

Frankly, it makes me angry to see how many Russians have been killed by that lax attitude towards personal risk and security.  Yes, it is very noble to be courageous, but to die killed by a manic is also plain dumb.  I would feel much better if Russian officials and politicians would be a little less courageous and a little more careful.  Because what happened today begs the question: who will it be the next time?


Conclusions

What happened today is a tragedy made twice as painful by the fact that it could probably have been avoided.  The Turkish security services will probably arrest overnight pretty much anybody and everybody Mevlut Mert Aydintas has ever met, and they will get lots of confessions.  I am pretty sure that they will share a lot of that data with the Russians, if only to show how sorry they are.  Alas, both the Turks and the Russians have an long tradition of secrecy and we might never find out who, if anybody, really was behind Mevlut Mert Aydintas.

The only thing I am sure of is that Putin will do nothing harsh regardless of who is behind this murder.  If it is the Takfiris, then the people involved will die in the next couple of years.  If the CIA is involved, however, the Russians will be much more careful and might chose to act in a very different way, possibly through the next Administration.  The murder of Ambassador Karlov will not succeed in derailing the Russian and Iranian efforts at getting some kind of a regional solution to the war in Syria, nor will it change the Russian determination to prevent the AngloZionst Empire of turning Syrian into yet another Takfiristan.

As for Russia and Turkey, as long as Erdogan remains in power they will continue to try to collaborate against the odds and in spite of deep and fundamental differences.  Neither Russia nor Turkey, which have fought each other in twelve wars, have any other option.