American Committee for US-Russia Accord

As Syrian rebels face an onslaught of Russian bombs ordered by Russian President Vladimir Putin, back in Washington President Barack Obama faces incoming volleys himself.

Critics claim Obama’s lack of response to Putin’s bombing campaign makes Obama looks “weak” in comparison…Former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brezinski even claims that because Russian forces in Syria are “geographically vulnerable” they could be “disarmed,” though without explaining how.

The fact is any escalation would be dangerous by definition, and of dubious benefit to the United States.

Our interests are to lure Russia away from a possible strategic partnership with China; establish a security architecture in Europe that protects both NATO countries and Russia; and work with Russia to stabilize the Middle East. When emotion and prejudice are put aside, Russia is revealed as a potential partner of ours, not an enemy.

While Trump is sometimes accused of abandoning the trans-Atlantic alliance and scuttling the post-war order, the president now risks further damage to relations with many in Europe by targeting Russia with fresh sanctions.

WASHINGTON — FOR four years, American policy toward Syria has been built on a wish and a prayer: a wish that President Bashar al-Assad would leave and a prayer that the “moderate” Syrian opposition would be more than it is. Now Russia has stepped up its game, and the response from the American government and many commentators seems to be to wish harder and pray more, while condemning Russia for intruding where it supposedly doesn’t belong.

Is President Trump losing control of Russia policy? Has he capitulated to the neocons? These are not academic questions. For consider the architect of the new arms package, Kurt Volker, the new U.S. Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations…

How the Economist changed its map of the Syrian conflict to make it look like Russia is bombing moderate rebels rather than al-Nusra. Russia started airstrikes in Syria on 30 September 2015 and has been accused by Western media and governments to target the rebels (portrayed as moderates) rather than the Islamic State. Yet research by Dr. Anthony Penaud has shown that this is hardly the case.

 

When all right-thinking people in the nation’s capital seem to agree on something – as has been the case recently with legislation imposing new sanctions on Russia – that may be a warning that the debate has veered into an unthinking herd mentality.

This hastily-written, badly flawed, and politically motivated law has the potential to harm the U.S. far more than Russia.

This article, published nearly a year ago by Dr. Theodore A. Postol,  professor emeritus of science, technology, and national security policy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, is well worth a read today as the potential for a head on US – Russian clash increases daily with the unfolding crisis in the skies over Syria.

Max Blumenthal and Ben Norton discuss the Democratic Party’s obsession with Russia, how this fixation is used to prevent progressive change, the lack of evidence for ambiguous accusations of “Russian interference,” and how the neoliberal Resistance actively cheers on Trump when he is bombing the Middle East.

The Independent’s Robert Fisk notes that the “rubbish has reached its crescendo in the on-again off-again saga of the Syrian “moderates”.  These men were originally military defectors to the FSA, which America and European countries regarded as a possible pro-Western force to be used against the Syrian government army. But the FSA fell to pieces, corrupted, and the “moderates” defected all over again, this time to the Islamist Nusrah Front or to Isis, selling their American-supplied weapons to the highest bidder…”

… the bill is consistent with, and puts in stark relief, a larger problem of Congress habitually using economic sanctions against foreign states as an expression of disapproval that is poorly designed to achieve any U.S. foreign policy objectives.

 We are informed via the Washington Post that “continued airstrikes Friday suggested that Russia’s main priority remains the anti-Assad rebellion in northern and western Syria, which poses a greater threat to the regime’s control over Damascus, the capital, than the forces of the Islamic State, concentrated in the far north and east of the country.”

This is a rather masterful insinuation of Russian malfeasance where none exists.

“Dialogue based on mutual respect” could improve U.S.-Russia relations

Well the ‘US good, Russia bad’ propaganda drive has reached full-blown hysteria mode this week. My sincerest compliments to the usual suspects, you are absolutely playing a blinder.

I’m especially impressed by how quickly you all became such staunch humanitarians and tallied up the civilian casualties from the handful of Russian strikes mere moments after the bombs were dropped. That’s dedication.

German exports to Russia have increased by twenty percent despite the existing sanctions against Russia, says University of Kent professor Richard Sakwa.