Briefly Noted: Wars And Rumors Of War
Simplicius the Thinker’s latest update on the war against Russia in Ukraine covers a lot of ground—as usual. He begins by noting, as we have, the multiple stories in the MSM that have been popping up, all of them suggesting that the end is nigh for Ukraine and leaking that the collective West is pressuring Ukraine to negotiate with Russia. Simplicius then focuses on the NBC story.
The problem with all these stories, as it seems to me, is that they mostly amount to wishful thinking. The various sources—and speculation has suggested that they may include Jake Sullivan and Susan Rice (that’s my spec)—are trying to sell the idea that the war is a stalemate and so Ukraine should try to make a good deal. That would involve giving Russia all the territory it now holds. That’s wishful thinking. Both Ukraine and Russia—for different reasons—deny that there is a stalemate in the war, and even the Western (and, increasingly, Ukrainian) sources admit that Ukraine is on the ropes. Ukraine simply lacks the trained manpower to operate the weapons that have been sent and is being reduced to trying to plug multiple leaks in their lines by shifting forces around—which Russia promptly begins degrading. It’s beginning to look like attrition on steroids. Which is why Russia also denies that the war is stalemated. They are accomplishing their goals, and even the Western sources also agree that Russia is simply getting stronger. USNews and World Report is ranking Russia as the #1 military power in the world.
The other aspect of wishful thinking is the idea that the West (meaning: the US) can actually sucker Russia into negotiating with Ukraine—short of a Ukrainian offer of unconditional surrender. Russia is showing no interest in such negotiations—Putin has openly mocked these NATO schemes. The Russian view is that there is no point in negotiating with anyone other than the country that is at war with Russia—the United States. That would be the only way to arrive at a some definitive resolution. Well, the Neocons will avoid negotiating with Russia as they would avoid being honest with the American people—in other words, like the plague.
As for the rumors of wars, M. K. Bhadrakumar has been been warning of a wider Middle East war since this war on Gaza began. Today he ran this article:
MKB’s argument runs something like this. US diplomacy has been an utter failure, and especially with regard to its centerpiece—isolating Iran. Therefore the US is being forced to fall back on military coercion:
Evidently, Tehran no longer sees a problem in acknowledging its fraternal links with the resistance groups. This is a paradigm shift indicative of the shift in the power dynamic, which the US and Israel are compelled to counter through use of force, Washington’s diplomacy having failed to make headway to isolate Iran.
The Chief of the Israeli General Staff, Herzi Halevi, said on Sunday during a meeting in the Northern Command, “We are ready to strike in the north at any moment. We understand that it can happen… We have a clear goal of restoring a significantly better security situation at the borders, not only in the Gaza Strip.”
No power on earth can stop Israel on its tracks now. Its stability and defence is inextricably linked to this war, which will also ensure abiding US commitment to its security as a key template of American global strategies for the foreseeable future. Therefore, Israel’s best chance of survival lies in expanding the scope of the war in Gaza into Lebanon — and possibly even into Syria — shoulder to shoulder with the Americans.
There is no question that the location of the US nuclear submarine to the east of Suez is an attempt to intimidate Iran from intervening, while Israel, with US backing, proceeds to open a second front in Lebanon. The Israeli authorities have announced evacuation of people from settlements located in a zone up to five kms from the border with Lebanon.
A war of indeterminate timeline is set to begin in the Middle East.
I’m cautiously skeptical of MKB’s argument. I don’t doubt that the US is attempting to intimidate Iran with its naval deployments. What I’m skeptical about is the idea that the US and Israel are planning a ground invasion of Lebanon and/or Syria. Whether one sub loaded with cruise missiles can accomplish even the goal of intimidation is open to question.
An Ohio-class submarine transits the Suez Canal, Nov. 5.US Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Jonathan Word
But let’s take this starting from the top.
Yes, US diplomacy has been an abject failure, which leaves the US with few if any options.
Halevi’s statement that “We are ready to strike in the north at any moment”, in and of itself is not an unambiguous claim that Israel is prepared to launch a ground invasion of Lebanon and/or Syria. A “strike” may simply be airborne attacks—missiles and bombs.
Expanding the scope of the war, possibly including both Lebanon and Syria, shoulder to shoulder with the Americans? Two points:
It isn’t clear that Israel is prepared for a ground war on that scale—much has changed even from the time of Israel’s disastrous defeat in Lebanon in 2006. Defense is king of the battlefield today, and Hezbollah has spent the better part of 20 years in defensive prep. We’ve seen what can be done in that regard in Ukraine, and the mountains of Lebanon provide far more formidable defensive potential than the black earth of Ukraine. A couple of thousand US Marines will not make a difference, and US air power is unlikely to succeed where Israeli air power has failed in the past.
There is one word missing from MKB’s article: Russia. Russia is in Syria, and has been reinforcing its positions there. Russia also has the hypersonic missiles that can reach out and touch all US naval assets—perhaps including that sub.
MKB presents the Israeli evacuation of residents within 5km of the Lebanese border as preparatory for launching a major and imminent war against Hezbollah. However, this evacuation was taken almost immediately following the Hamas attack of October 7. It had the appearance of a precautionary move rather than preparation for a major new war. I can’t say that MKB is wrong about this, but I would argue that he is forcing his argument a bit by making too much of this move.
Finally, MKB also makes much of the trip of CIA Director Burns to Israel
In a related development, perhaps, the CIA director, William Burns arrived in Israel on Sunday for urgent consultations. The New York Times reported that the US is “looking to expand its intelligence sharing with Israel.”
“Looking to expand its intelligence sharing with Israel”, in context, can mean a lot of different things in this situation. “Perhaps” is the key word here. Perhaps Burns was sent to Israel because it was believed that Burns was possessed of more gravitas than the hapless Blinken, and would be better able to go toe to toe with the notoriously arrogant and overbearing Netanyahu. That’s exactly the interpretation that the WSJ put on Burns’ trip—that it wasn’t in preparation for a major new war but was instead to try to pressure Netanyahu into taking direction from DC (I quote from Breitbart):
The Biden administration is ratcheting up pressure on the Israeli government to declare a “pause” in fighting against Hamas — even as Israel continues to push the terror organization into a corner.
On Friday, as Breitbart News reported, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu firmly and publicly rejected calls for a “pause,” saying there would be no stop to the fighting until Hamas released the 240 hostages it still holds in Gaza.
The Wall Street Journal reported Monday:
President Biden, in a phone call Monday with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, urged the Israeli leader to declare a humanitarian pause, White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said.
The conversation came hours after Central Intelligence Agency Director Bill Burns arrived in Israel, following a visit to the region by Secretary of State Antony Blinken. Biden’s special envoy for the Middle East, David Satterfield, also returned to Israel, seeking to negotiate the terms of a temporary pause in its assault to allow more humanitarian aid into Gaza.
…
Israeli defiance over a humanitarian pause has been a source of contention with Washington—including with Biden, who has grown increasingly frustrated by Israel’s refusal, officials said.
None of that—to include Burns’ participation—looks like prep for a shoulder to shoulder US-Israeli offensive into Lebanon and/or Syria. It looks much more like a desperate effort to stop the bleeding—not of Gazans but of US standing in the world. I continue to believe that there are too many dangers involved in such a scheme, and that the Deep State will move heaven and earth to avoid such an outcome. The question is whether they can move Netanyahu.
https://sonar21.com/amichai-eliyahu-lets-the-nuclear-cat-out-of-the-bag-and-machine-guns-for-israel/
... comments of Amichai Eliyahu, Israel’s Jerusalem Affairs and Heritage Minister. Mr. Eliyahu appeared on an Israeli radio broadcast and said the following:
Speaking in a radio interview, the far-right minister maintained that “there are no non-combatants in Gaza,” adding that providing humanitarian aid to the Strip would constitute “a failure.”
Eliyahu was then asked if – since there are no non-combatants in his view – a nuclear attack on the Gaza Strip is an option. “That’s one way,” he responded.
The Biden Administration is much more focused on stopping the bleeding with key voter constituencies, than of U.S. standing.
And they still dream of a grand nuke deal with Iran.
Their focus is on oil prices, and worries of the Middle East War expands it could be an economic catastrophe, which would destroy the Dems chance in 2024, beyond the margin of cheating.
Basically the Biden Administration is saying they support Israel publicly, while pressing Netanyahu for a ceasefire.
The “passionate” protests including at the Whitehouse are adding more pressure to the Biden Administration. I guess putting Kamala in charge of combatting Islamophobia did not help heal the Democrats internal civil war.