Earth-Shaking word from Trump Tower here in New York is that a “yuuuuuge” change to US foreign policy is in the works, involving Syria and other areas.  “Rebels that have been backed by the US in Syria should go home right now” said one key player in the ongoing presidential transition plans who insisted on anonymity due to the serious nature of the topic.

“The United States will not back the forcible overthrow of Democratically elected governments” under a Trump Administration and, “Neither the United States military nor its weapons technology will be for rent to destabilize one government to the benefit of another, or to advance corporate interests.  US-Backed “rebels” in Syria  — and elsewhere — should go home right now.”

The individual who offered the quotes, did so in writing and insisted they be conveyed precisely as shown above, with “not one word or punctuation mark changed.” This individual also insisted the document provided be “shredded, burned and its ashes discarded in the wind outside prior to publication.”  That has been done.

The fact that this type of potential policy change has even been mentioned outside the closed-door world of international geopolitical intrigue is major, even earth-shaking in its implications.  It would be a staggering change to US policy with implications that literally span the globe.

If undertaken by the new Administration, the so-called “civil war” in Syria would likely end overnight.  But such a change would also have immediate implications in places like Ukraine and even Yemen as well.

This revelation comes hours after it was reported that Monday, Russian President Vladimir Putin had a telephone call with US President-Elect Donald Trump.  The two spoke of improving relations and also discussed certain issues.  The big take-away from that call was the agreement by both men to “Take out Terrorists.”  That telephone call is reported HERE

BEGIN OP-ED

BELOW IS ANALYSIS AND OPINION MIXED WITH NEWS FACTS.  We draw this line clearly so readers understand what is “news” versus what is analysis and opinion.

In weighing the stunning news above that the US will not back rebels to overthrow democratically-elected governments and that US-Backed Rebels is Syria should go home, it is absolutely vital that readers have an understanding of just how bad things are, and how they got so bad, what the world is facing as a result of US behaviors overseas, and what it means that US policy is being changed.  Below is that background.

SYRIA

The conflict in Syria erupted in 2011, quite by coincidence, just after Syrian President Bashar Assad refused to permit a natural gas pipeline running from Qatar, in the Middle East, to Europe, to be built through Syria.

Email communications allegedly uncovered from the laptop of former Congressman Anthony Weiner during the recent election campaign, allegedly show that foreign governments like Qatar made cash contributions to the Clinton Foundation while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State.  That money is of particular interest because about a Million Dollars from Qatar allegedly arrived to the Foundation after the Syrian President Bashar Assad, REFUSED to allow Qatar to run a natural gas pipeline through Syria to supply gas to Europe.

MORE-Intel Analyst: “It’s crazy, Russia Is Preparing Almost Everything For WAR. Time To Be ‘deeply Concerned’-Now Mobilization of 300,000 TROOPS!

Not long after that million was donated, seven (7) experienced operatives from the CIA were dispatched to Syria, allegedly on orders from the US State Department which Clinton headed.  Those 7 CIA operatives reportedly created the Free Syrian Army (FSA), to begin efforts to forcibly overthrow President Assad of Syria.  The operatives reportedly recruited Jihadis and others and began launching attacks inside Syria to destabilize its government, while the State Department churned out a media onslaught describing President Assad as a “brutal dictator” who “tortured his own people” and “used chemical weapons against civilians” etc., etc., etc. This fomented what would become the now 5 year old Syrian “Civil War.”

BILLIONS AT STAKE

Each country through which such a pipeline runs, charges a fee to the pipeline owner based upon the amount of gas run through the pipeline and the distance of that pipeline through each country.   But Syria saw the pipeline as damaging to their ally, Russia.  Moreover, at the same time as Qatar was planning a pipeline to Europe, Iran was planning one of its own, also to run through Syria.

In order to understand the geopolitics involved, it is important at this point to note that Russia provides the overwhelming majority of natural gas to Europe.  This gives Russia a degree of power over Europe; which neither the Europeans nor previous US Administrations felt comfortable about.

The Qatar pipeline would lessen or eliminate Europe’s dependence upon Russian gas which, from a geopolitical power perspective, would allow Europe and the US to better “control” Russia’s power abroad.

At the time, Iran was still under UN Sanctions over its alleged nuclear program and pretty much the entire western world did not want Iran to suddenly be earning billions from supplying gas to Europe.  Here’s how the Iranian Pipeline was to be built:

Under the Qatar plan, the pipeline would have traveled through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and Turkey.  The Iranian pipeline would travel through Iraq, Syria and a much smaller area of Turkey.

While Turkey is still a secular state, its financial interest in the Qatar pipeline stemmed from the distance that pipeline would travel through Turkey; much longer than the proposed Iranian pipeline.  the longer distance of the Qatar pipeline means more money for Turkey.  But interests other than money were also at stake.  Qatar is Sunni Muslim.  Iran is Shi’ite Muslim.  Sunni and Shi’ite do not seem to get along . . . at all.

This religious component caused other nations to get involved in what would become the Syrian conflict.  Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Turkey joined together to support the overthrow of the Syrian government because those countries are mostly Sunni Muslim like Qatar. They all have an interest in curtailing the growth and influence of Iran and its Shi’ite belief system.

So it was in the interest of Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Turkey to make certain the Qatar Pipeline was built and the Iranian pipeline was not.

For Syria, it made no difference.  Either pipeline would result in about the same amount of revenue for that country.  But Syria was in the way of the Qatar pipeline and that just wasn’t going to be allowed by the Sunnis regimes in the Middle East or the US.

As the Syrian conflict grew, it became clear just how much Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Turkey were involved.  Rebel camps which were uncovered in various battles, contained food, clothing, weapons and ammunition all found to have originated in Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Turkey!  Late in the conflict (just this year) weapons and ammunition from the United States were also found in rebel camps.

Battling proxy armies from all these countries did not go well for Syria.  As it became clear the Syrian government would fall, President Bashar Assad reached out to his ally, Russia, for military assistance.  He got it.

Russia came into battle with two goals:

1) Stop the rebel overthrow of its ally, the Syrian government, AND;

2) Stop terrorist groups like ISIS and al-Qaida, which had entered the fray.

But there was a problem: Determining who was a “rebel” and who was a “terrorist” was not an easy task.  So Russia turned to the United States and asked the US to identify who was who.  The US failed to do so, in part because the US did not want Russia attacking the rebels being backed by the US, Saudi Arabia, Jordan et al, and, unfortunately, because there are no clear lines between who is a “rebel” and who is a “terrorist.”

After delaying and delaying, then obstructing and obstructing by the US over this issue, the Russians ultimately told the US to either crap or get off the pot.  The US was told to identify who was who, or Russia would simply go after all the people it felt were attacking the Syrian government.  At that point, the US cut cooperation with Russia!

In the interim, the US began churning out anti-Russian propaganda. Even the campaign of Hillary Clinton was in on it, demonizing Russia for allegedly interfering in the election, and openly promising to “confront Russia” if Clinton was elected.

MORE-War Is Coming, The Whole World Knows It Except The People Of The United States.Wake Up People!

While all this was going on, the US and its NATO allies, began moving tanks, troops and missile systems to the Russian Border with Europe.  Through media outlets, the US and NATO began claiming that Russia had once again become “aggressive” and a push to demonize the Russian Federation began churning out all sorts of rhetoric.

The decision by the Obama administration to cut cooperation with Russia in Syria, just two months or so ago, meant the US was defacto “protecting” the terrorists in ISIS and al-Qaida. The decision by the US and NATO to begin moving troops, tanks and missile systems to the Russian border with Europe made it clear to the Russians that the stage was being set for actual war between the US/NATO and Russia.  All this over a pipeline and the desire to “control” Russia.

Seeing what was being done in Syria, what was still ongoing in Ukraine, and the troops tanks and missile sy
stems being placed on its border by the US and NATO, Russia knew that __it__ was in the cross-hairs.  So on October 18, the Kremlin publicly made clear that if war broke out in Syria it would not simply be war in Syria;  “it would be war everywhere.”

The American and European people were kept in the dark over these developments by the western mass-media.  But thanks to the Internet and alternative news sites like SuperStation95, reporting was getting out about what was taking place and these reports began to awaken the American people.

UKRAINE

What the US and NATO did in Ukraine was another disaster.   Ukraine is a former satellite of the now defunct Soviet Union.  Ukraine was not a member of NATO.  This lack of membership was, in part, due to a commitment made by former Secretary of state James Baker.

When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 and dissolved itself, the Russians were very concerned that their vulnerability might be exploited.  So they asked for an assurance that, since they were no longer a threat to Europe, that NATO agree not to expand itself?  Secretary of State Baker told Russia that NATO “will not move one inch eastward.”