Look Who Hillary Hired for Benghazi Help

Posted on October 12, 2015October 12, 2015 by Denise Simon

Richard Verma: Presently in India selling a ‘people to people cooperation’ to tackle climate change, Verma was nominated by Obama to serve as Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs when he left in 2011. He is a lawyer at Steptoe & Johnson and was an advisor to Harry Reid from 2002-2007.

Oh, then there were some Hillary and Richard Verma email exchanges with particular questions to the matter of the Russian reset in 2010.

Clinton tapped D.C. lawyer to help respond to Benghazi questions

*Richard Verma had ‘special government employee’ designation

*He worked at State Department while retaining his job at a law firm

*State Department inspector general launched inquiry into the program

WASHINGTON by Anita Kumar, McClatchy

Hillary Clinton tapped a former State Department employee to help respond to various inquires from Capitol Hill after the 2012 fatal attacks in Benghazi, Libya, at the same he was being paid by his law firm.

Richard Verma was designated a “special government employee,” allowing him to work at the department as well as at Steptoe & Johnson law firm, according to an email he wrote that was obtained by Citizens United, a conservative group that has filed lawsuits to access records from the State Department.

The arrangement has prompted additional questions about the way the federal program at the State Department was used while Clinton served as secretary of state.

Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has long been concerned about the use of the program, which was supposed to be designed to allow the government to bring aboard outside talent to fill voids in its expertise.

“It’s not clear that responding to congressional inquiries is how the special employee designation was meant to be used,” Grassley said Thursday. “It was designed to get special expertise that the government can’t get in-house. Agencies already have congressional affairs staff who are employed to help respond to congressional inquiries. The State Department has stretched the definition in several cases.”

A similar arrangement involving another of Clinton’s closest confidants, Huma Abedin, led the State Department inspector general to launch a review into the department’s use of the designation and, apparently, whether it was abused in the hiring of Abedin, who was working at the State Department and Teneo, a company that provides political intelligence to clients.

In August, Grassley asked the FBI whether the inspector general’s office had notified the bureau of any inquiry into Abedin that had evolved into “a full-fledged criminal investigation.” The FBI referred Grassley to the inspector general.

The inspector general’s office declined to comment Thursday on the status of its inquiry.

“The special government employee designation is not limited to specific types of position descriptions,” State Department spokesman Alec Gerlach said.

Clinton campaign officials did not respond to requests for comment.

Grassley has been asking whether the State Department’s “excessive use” of the program undermines government ethical standards, because conflicts of interest can arise when a government employee is simultaneously working for a private contractor.

Revelations of private email use and multiple jobs held at the same time by one individual raised more questions. Now, more details are coming in, and they warrant more questions. The bottom line is still whether the taxpayers are well-served by agency practices and spending. No one will know for sure until the State Department is more transparent about how it operates. Senate Judiciary Chairman Charles Grassley

The inspector general told him in a letter that the office would examine whether the program “conforms to applicable legal and policy requirements” and safeguards against any possible conflicts of interest. The employees may or may not be paid.

Clinton, now the front-runner for the 2016 Democratic nomination for president, has been under fire for actions at the State Department, including exclusively using a personal email account for government work, as well as her response to the attacks in Benghazi that led to four deaths, including the ambassador.

Clinton’s chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, asked Verma, now U.S. ambassador to India, to help respond to various congressional requests related to Libya because of his background working on Capitol Hill, according to the Verma email of Oct. 12, 2012, in which he outlined his job arrangement.

“Cheryl thought my prior experience handling investigations and my work on the Hill would be useful in advising the team as they process requests,” he wrote to two State Department officials.

Verma, a former assistant secretary of state for legislative affairs, led the State Department’s efforts on Capitol Hill and served as a senior member of Clinton’s team.

His unpaid advisory role began Oct. 1, 2012. Verma said he would spend two to three hours a day discussing issues, primarily with the State Department legislative team. The designation is given on an annual basis, according to the department, but Verma said he had expected to work for 60 days.

In his email, Verma indicated he was issued a State Department identification, email account and Blackberry so he could keep his responsibilities apart from his full-time job. He had been working on President Obama’s re-election campaign but stopped when he went back to the State Department.

As we discussed, any political activities that I undertake must be done on my personal time, and not involve government resources. I obviously have followed that guidance strictly. Richard Verma in a letter to the State Department

Citizens United began filing Freedom of Information Act requests at the State Department last year in hopes of getting enough information to produce a documentary about Clinton. They have sued the State Department for unresponsive requests multiple times.

Obama nominated Verma, who also had worked at Albright Stonebridge Group and the Center for American Progress, to be ambassador in September 2014, more than a year after Clinton had left the State Department. He had also worked as a senior national security adviser, counsel and foreign policy adviser to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article38260920.html#emlnl=Morning_Newsletter#storylink=cpy

Obama Sells Syrian Peace Talks that Will Never Come

Posted on October 12, 2015October 12, 2015 by Denise Simon

As noted in the Steve Kroft, 60 Minutes interview with Barack Obama, when challenged on leadership, Obama said he leads on climate change.

The White House has falsely created a bucket-load of people to blame for any intelligence failures, including declaring CENTCOM had modified intelligence reports to make al Qaeda appear as though the terror group was decimated, which is hardly a fact of today.

It should also be noted, the U.S. intelligence agencies collaborate several times daily with allied foreign intelligence services and the United Nations has their own intelligence pathways. In fact, the UN has been approached to seek urgent agreements of peace, no-fly zones, cease fires or a discussion on a coalition government for Syria.

WASHINGTON —CIA-backed rebels in Syria, who had begun to put serious pressure on President Bashar Assad’s forces, are now under Russian bombardment with little prospect of rescue by their American patrons, U.S. officials say.

Over the past week, Russia has directed parts of its air campaign against U.S.-funded groups and other moderate opposition in a concerted effort to weaken them, the officials say. The Obama administration has few options to defend those it had secretly armed and trained.

The Russians “know their targets, and they have a sophisticated capacity to understand the battlefield situation,” said Rep. Mike Pompeo, R-Kan., who serves on the House Intelligence Committee and was careful not to confirm a classified program. “They are bombing in locations that are not connected to the Islamic State” group. More here.

So, within DC, there are arguments at every corner about what to do with regard to Russia, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Yemen and Afghanistan. It is not a matter of failed intelligence. Saudi Arabia is especially concerned about Syria and has been equipping anti-Assad forces. The Saudis met with the Russians over the weekend.

DailyBeast;

Politicians in Washington are pointing their fingers at spies for making them look silly on Russia and Syria. Did our spies mess up again?

As Russia continues airstrikes in Syria, a fight is brewing between members of Congress and U.S. intelligence agencies over what lawmakers were told about the Russian military operations, and when.The House Intelligence Committee, which oversees the CIA and other spy agencies responsible for tracking the Russian military buildup in Syria, is “looking at possible problems in the timely provision of information to Congress,” a congressional staff member told The Daily Beast. Three other officials confirmed that the inquiry—which is not a formal investigation—is underway and that lawmakers have been talking to intelligence officials about whether their reports to Congress accurately predicted when the Russian air strikes would begin and that they would target rebel groups fighting the regime of Bashar al-Assad.

U.S. intelligence officials fired back that they had provided lawmakers with warnings about Russia’s intentions to begin military operations in Syria, including in the weeks before airstrikes began in late September.

“Any suggestion that the intelligence community was surprised by Russia’s military support to the Assad regime is misleading,” a senior intelligence official told The Daily Beast. Members of Congress had access to intelligence reports on the movements of Russian aircraft into Syria as well as the buildup of ground troops and could read them anytime they chose, another official said.

Russia has long been a subject of close scrutiny for the CIA and other intelligence agencies. But since the end of the Cold War and a post-9/11 shift to focusing on terrorist organizations and the rise of extremist groups, some lawmakers have questioned whether the agencies are paying enough attention to old foes in Moscow.

“For several years, the Intelligence Community has provided regular assessments of Russia’s military, political, and financial support to the [Assad] regime,” Brian Hale, a spokesperson for the Director of National Intelligence, said in a statement. “In recent months, the Intelligence Community tracked and reported Moscow’s determination to play a more direct role in propping up Assad’s grip on power, including its deployment of offensive military assets to Syria. While these events unfolded quickly, the IC carried out its responsibilities with equal agility.”

The pushback from officials underscored how sensitive the agencies are to allegations of “intelligence failures” and in particular being behind the curve about Russia’s international ambitions and the rise of extremists groups in the Middle East. The Defense Department is also investigating allegations that senior intelligence officials at the military’s Central Command manipulated intelligence reports to paint a rosy picture about the U.S.-led air campaign against the so-called Islamic State, widely known as ISIS, in Iraq and Syria.

The congressional inquiry also highlights how politicized the Obama administration’s strategy in Syria has become in the wake of a total breakdown in the U.S. military’s training of rebel groups and a 13-month-old U.S.-led air campaign that has failed to destroy ISIS forces in Syria or Iraq.

The White House defended the quality of the intelligence reporting on Syria and noted that journalists had also been tracking the deployment of military aircraft and ground troops into the country.

“I don’t think there was anybody that had the expectation in the administration that Russia wasn’t prepared to use that equipment to advance what they view as their interests inside of Syria,” White House press secretary Josh Earnest said on Thursday, adding that officials had already assessed Russia and wanted to prop up the embattled Assad regime before the airstrikes began.

“I don’t think that’s a surprise,” Earnest said. “The president, before Russia commenced their military activities, said that a decision by Russia to double down on Assad militarily would be a losing bet. That’s something that the President said before we saw this Russian military activity and we continue to believe that that’s true.”

Reuters first reported that lawmakers were examinig possible intelligence lapses over Russia’s intervention and were concerned that intelligence agencies were slow to grasp Putin’s intentions.

That’s a charge that lawmakers have made in the past.

After Russian forces invaded the Crimean peninsula in Ukraine in 2014, lawmakers blasted the Pentagon and intelligence community for failing to anticipate Putin’s plans.

“It was not predicted by our intelligence. That is well known, which is another massive failure because of our total misreading of the intentions of Vladimir Putin,” Sen. John McCain told then-Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel during a hearing. That prompted James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, to defend his analysts’ work.

“I have lived through some genuine intelligence failures in my career, and this was not a failure by any stretch,” Clapper said in an interview with Washington news radio station WTOP in March 2014.

“We tracked [the situation in Ukraine] pretty carefully and portrayed what the possibilities were and certainly portrayed the difficulties we’d have, because of the movements of Russian troops and provided anticipatory warning of their incursion into Crimea,” Clapper said.

Three months later, when ISIS forces rolled into the Iraqi city of Mosul and established a major foothold inside the country, the agencies again found themselves on the defensive, recounting all the times they’d said they warned lawmakers about the rising strength of ISIS in the region and how it could threaten security. Critics said, however, that the intelligence agencies hadn’t predicted ISIS would take over whole cities, and that the reporting wasn’t specific enough to develop a counterattack.

The debate over intelligence assessments on Russia’s recent airstrikes has a similar theme. Lawmakers are zeroing in on specific reporting about military movements and potential targets, as well assessments about Putin’s intentions and his strategy, to get at the question of how the U.S. response to Russia’s operation might have been different with other kinds of information.

Rep. Adam Schiff, the senior Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee said in a statement on Thursday that it was “certainly true that few would have predicted that Putin would react to the weakening position of the Assad regime by sending in combat aircraft and augmenting its naval presence. An increase in Russia’s material support for the Assad regime seemed much more probable.”

That suggested that some lawmakers viewed the intelligence assessments as not declarative or precise enough for Congress to understand how the events would unfold.

But, Schiff added, “As Putin’s intention to deploy more military power to Syria became clearer in recent weeks, the Intelligence Community kept the Committee apprised of those developments. Although we will continue to look into the timeliness and accuracy of intelligence assessments, I do not think we should rush to find fault with the Intelligence Community in its ability to discern exactly what is in Putin’s head.”

Military and intelligence officials did warn that Russia was likely to begin military operations in Syria in the days before air strikes began.

Nine days before Russia’s first bombing runs on Syrian rebel groups, including those that the CIA had given weapons and training, three U.S. officials told The Daily Beast that airstrikes would begin “soon.” They noted that Russian drone flights to scout potential targets were underway—those same flights were also reported on social media by eyewitnesses in Syria.

The officials’ assessment on the imminence of Russian airstrikes marked a shift from previous statements, when officials had said they weren’t sure whether Russia intended to use force in Syria and enter into the country’s long and brutal civil war. That shifting analysis reflected the rapid increase in the number of Russian jets in the region, as well as reports by eyewitnesses that Russian military forces were working with Assad’s army. Videos supporting those claims could be found on YouTube.

And yet, those aggressive, visible moves were met with hardly a shrug in some circles in Washington.

“There are not discussions happening here about what this means for U.S. influence on the war against ISIS,” one defense official told The Daily Beast at the time.

In light of the administration’s response, it’s questionable whether more precise assessments of Russia’s movements would have led to any attempts to head off its intervention.

Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said that reading the Russian leader’s mind was all but impossible.

“Putin notoriously keeps a tight counsel and employs a deliberate strategy of improvisation and unpredictability,” Schiff said. “That said, we need to make sure that we appropriately prioritize so-called hard targets like Russia.”

Obama Does Gun Control, Putin Does Hockey, No Phone Calls

Posted on October 8, 2015October 8, 2015 by Denise Simon

Scary with all this going on…no one is talking to each other especially when Defense Secretary Ash Carter says we will not cooperate or coordinate with Russia.

Carter: “Now, the Russians originally said they were going in to fight ISIL and al-Nusra and other terrorist organizations. However, within days of deploying their forces, the Russians began striking targets that are not any of these groups. I have said repeatedly over the last week that we, the United States, believed this is a fundamental strategic mistake and that it will inflame and prolong the Syrian civil war. We have not and will not agree to cooperate with Russia so long as they continue to pursue this misguided strategy. We’ve seen increasingly unprofessional behavior from Russian forces. They violated Turkish airspace, which as all of us here made clear earlier this week, and strongly affirmed today here in Brussels, is NATO airspace.” The full remarks by Carter while in Belgium are here.

Confluence or Conflating

Kearsarge ARG Deploys for Europe, Middle East Operations

The Kearsarge Amphibious Ready Group and 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit departed Oct. 6 from the East Coast for a deployment to the Middle East.

The more than 4,000 sailors and Marines will support theater security cooperation and maritime security operations and provide an added crisis response capability to U.S. 5th and 6th Fleet areas of operations.

The ARG/MEU includes amphibious assault ship USS Kearsarge (LHD-3), amphibious transport dock ship USS Arlington (LPD-24), amphibious dock landing ship USS Oak Hill (LSD-51),

Kearsarge and the 26th MEU last deployed from March to November 2013, during a time of great unrest in the region. Kearsarge and USS San Antonio (LPD-17) spent a lot of time in the northern part of the region – operating in the Mediterranean out of Rota, Spain, and in the northern Red Sea – while USS Carter Hall (LSD-50) spent time operating independently near Bahrain and Djibouti.

Upon returning home, Kearsarge spent five months in maintenance at BAE Systems Norfolk Ship Repair before beginning sea trials last summer. Kearsarge served as the flagship in the Bold Alligator 2014 amphibious exercise last fall.

Rocket Launch with Secret Payload

United Launch Alliance aims to launch its second Atlas V rocket in less than a week with a blastoff planned Thursday morning from California’s Central Coast.

The rocket is targeting a liftoff at 5:49 a.m. PT from Vandenberg Air Force Base, carrying a classified mission for the National Reconnaissance Office.

There’s a 70% chance of acceptable weather at Vandenberg’s Space Launch Complex-3. The full launch window has not been disclosed.

“We are excited and ready to take on our first Atlas launch of 2015,” said Col. J. Christopher Moss, commander of the 30th Space Wing, in a statement Wednesday. “Our team and mission partners have put a lot of hard work into preparing for this important mission for our nation.”
Amateur spacecraft observers speculate that the rocket is carrying a pair of satellites updating the Naval Ocean Surveillance System, or NOSS.

In addition to the primary mission, the rocket’s Centaur upper stage will deliver a group of 13 experimental and student-developed CubeSats to orbit.

The tiny spacecraft include nine missions sponsored by the NRO and four by NASA. Kennedy Space Center’s Launch Services Program was responsible for securing the ride for the NASA-sponsored payloads known as ElaNA-12.

A successful launch would keep ULA on track to return to Cape Canaveral for an Oct. 30 launch of the Air Force’s next Global Positioning System satellite on an Atlas V. The booster for that mission was delivered to the Cape on Tuesday.
An Atlas V last Friday successfully delivered Mexico’s Morelos-3 communications satellite to orbit, completing ULA’s 100th launch since Boeing and Lockheed Martin formed the joint venture in December 2006.

And Wednesday, in the first launch since an Antares rocket exploded shortly after takeoff on Oct. 29, 2014, a sounding rocket successfully blasted off from NASA’s Wallops Space Facility in Virginia.

“It wasn’t an easy decision,” an Iranian official source said when asked about Russia’s intervention in Syria. “The Russians were certain that if they did not move now, the next war they would fight would be inside their borders; this is about Russia’s national security before being about Syria. Therefore, a decision to start this pre-emptive war was taken by the Kremlin.”

For decades, Syria has been one of Russia’s main allies in the Middle East. The collapse of the Soviet Union didn’t change anything in this regard. Moscow continued to support Damascus with whatever necessary to keep the old empire’s last balcony on the warm waters of the Mediterranean Sea.

Russian President Vladimir Putin arrives to speak at a Presidential Council for Civil Society and Human Rights meeting in the Grand Kremlin Palace on Oct. 1, 2015, in Moscow, Russia.

Russia Gets Back in the Game

In 2011, amid the eruption of the revolution in Syria, the Russians started feeling the heat. It was almost obvious to them that the fall of the regime in Damascus would lead to serious changes in Russia’s status in the Middle East; thus this wasn’t an option to even think about, and everything possible should be done to maintain the regime and keep it breathing, should this be using the veto in the UN Security Council, sending arms and ammunitions, or as we are witnessing today, intervening militarily and fighting to keep the status quo. Russia is not the only ally of the Syrian government; Iran also has been supporting President Bashar al-Assad.

Russia and Iran have not previously been allies. They share common interests, common allies and common rivals; however, this doesn’t necessarily mean they act as allies. In Syria, their common interest has been — and still is — keeping their common ally, the regime, alive. Even within the Syrian regime, there are different views among the ranks on how to deal with both countries; there are officials who are seen as “Iranians” and others as “Russians.” This is prompted by fears among one wing that the Islamic Republic’s agenda in Syria involves Islamization of society, while the other wing that prefers the Iranians sees them as very reliable since they were the first to roll their sleeves up in the fight for the regime’s existence. Yet, this is only a matter of preferences, and nothing more.

Russian Dumb Bombs Land in Iran, ooops

Posted on October 8, 2015October 8, 2015 by Denise Simon

TWS: A number of cruise missiles launched from a Russian ship and aimed at targets in Syria have crashed in Iran, two U.S. officials told CNN Thursday. Monitoring by U.S. military and intelligence assets has concluded that at least four missiles crashed as they flew over Iran. One official said there may be casualties, but another official said this is not yet known.

Evidently, Russian ordinance is not quite state the art and Putin’s weapons do not match up with his will. Hard to imagine that will deter him.

***

Russia has very few precision guided missiles valued at $26,000 each, so they aging inventory of dumb bombs dropped manually, valued at $600 each are the ordnance of choice. So, accuracy by Russian pilots is well…lousy.

Why is Russia using ‘dumb bombs’ in Syria?

Russian planes bomb the old-fashioned way, letting the bombs just fall

Experts: Kremlin doesn’t have vast supplies of precision-guided missiles

Risk: An old-fashioned, unguided bomb drifts off course, lands in Turkey

WASHINGTON

Russia has made little use of precision-guided bombs during its young air campaign in Syria, a choice that experts say increases the chances that more civilians will be killed in the strikes and that a stray bomb hitting Turkey could bring other NATO nations into the war.

That danger was illustrated over the weekend when a Russian aircraft crossed into Turkey and a second warplane breached a Turkish-monitored safety zone inside Syria as they conducted bombing runs in northern Syria. Turkey scrambled jets to intercept the intruders, and NATO issue a sharp rebuke over the incidents.

A repeat, however, is highly likely, because unlike the United States military, Russia doesn’t have a vast supply of the precision-guided weapons that have become the hallmark of American air power.

Since the start of the U.S.-led air war in Iraq and Syria more than a year ago, American military leaders repeatedly have boasted that the current U.S.-led air campaign is the most surgical that American forces ever have conducted, thanks to the use of laser-guided missiles, GPS targeting and other high-tech systems. Last week, Army Col. Steve Warren, the spokesman for Operation Inherent Resolve, called the airstrikes over Iraq and Syria “the most precise in the history of warfare.”

“The amount of care that we have taken to preserve civilian life, to preserve civilian infrastructure is unprecedented,” he said.

Still, that care has not saved the lives of hundreds of civilians who’ve died in U.S. airstrikes. While the U.S. Central Command, which runs American military operations in the Middle East, has acknowledged responsibility for only two such collateral killings – the deaths of two children in a November 2014 bombing raid in Syria – human rights groups and local activists put the numbers much higher.

Russian bombing is likely to take an even higher toll, experts say, for one simple reason: Russia is bombing the old-fashioned way: flying its planes over the target, releasing the bombs and letting gravity carry them to their ground targets.

“I can’t definitively rule out that they haven’t used any of their advanced guided munitions, but so far there is nothing in the images and video we’ve seen of the actual strikes that indicates the use of those guided munitions yet,” said Sim Tack, a Russian military analyst with Stratfor, an Austin, Texas-based group that sells geopolitical intelligence to U.S. and international corporations and government agencies.

Tack and other experts offered a range of theories for why the Russians aren’t using precision-guided missiles in Syria, from their much higher cost (precision-guided weapons cost from $26,000 to $1.1 million each; an unguided bomb as little as $600) and the Kremlin’s relative inexperience in employing them, to looser rules of engagement that allow Russian pilots to identify their targets with relative impunity from discipline over civilian deaths.

“There are at least some pilots in the Russian air force who have some capability of using (precision-guided weapons),” Tack said. “If the Russians wanted to make it a priority right now, they could do so. The fact that they are not probably means they’re fine with doing things as they are.”

But beyond the increased threat to civilians, Russia’s bombing strategy carries a still greater risk: Sparking a wider war by hitting Turkey, even if only incidentally.

Satellite imagery and reports from Syrians in the area indicate that some Russian bombs have landed as close as 200 yards from the Turkish border.

10,684 The number of Islamic State sites that U.S. Central Command says were hit by American bombs during the first year of Operation Inherent Resolve, including buildings, fighting positions, staging areas, Humvees, oil infrastructure, tanks and other targets.

“The lighter a bomb is, the more surface area it has, the higher you drop it from and the stronger the wind, the farther it can drift off course,” Tack said. “I would say that 200 meters is definitely dangerously close to the border, if that’s where they are conducting their bombings.”

Dmitri Gorenburg, a researcher at Harvard’s Davis Center for Russian Studies and an analyst for the CNA think tank in Arlington, Va., said successive Russian governments showed little regard for civilian life during their short-lived 2008 war in the former Soviet republic of Georgia or earlier during two wars totaling more than 10 years in the vast country’s Muslim-dominated Chechnya region.

“In Chechnya, there was wholesale destruction of (the regional capital) Grozny, not just from aircraft but with artillery as well,” Gorenburg told McClatchy. “And if you look at (the Russian incursion in) Ukraine recently, there haven’t been too many qualms about using artillery on population centers. So Russia certainly has demonstrated less care about harming civilians.”

Gorenburg said that Russia may be more hesitant to use precision bombs simply because it possesses fewer of them than do the United States and its more technologically advanced allies.

“They don’t want to use up all their (precision-guided weapons) in Syria, so they use the dumb bombs instead,” Gorenburg told McClatchy. “From their point of view, given the scale of destruction that’s already taken place in Syria, it may not matter as much if some stray building gets hit.”

Gorenburg said that Moscow may be starting its air campaign by using bombs it had previously given or sold to the Syrian government, a longtime Russia ally.

“Because Syria uses the same (Russian-made) planes, they can use the bombs they’ve provided Syria the last few years,” he said. “They weren’t giving the Syrians anything too fancy or expensive.”

Pentagon: USA is Now ‘Putin’s Prison Bitch’

Posted on October 8, 2015October 8, 2015 by Denise Simon

When Barack Obama surrenders diplomacy and military power in full retreat, others are invited to step in. The Pentagon is keen on the conditions and the attitude is, America is now a lil’ bitch of Putin. this blogger would add Iran and China to that conclusion.

Some argue this began with Barack Obama’s shallow red-line on Syrian use of chemical weapons and deferring action to Russia to solve, perhaps the real opening for Iran and Russia was the failed operation and fallout on Libya, coupled with abandoning the Kurds and Yazidis in Iraq.

From TheHill in part: The ferocity of Russia’s air campaign will all but certainly exacerbate the crisis, fuel additional support for ISIS and further cleanse Syria of Sunni Muslims, improving the demographic balance for the nominally Shiite Assad regime.

Whether the administration was, as The Washington Post reported, “blindsided” by Russian military operations, or whether it quietly welcomed the bombing as some kind of macabre burden-sharing, Moscow’s Syrian initiative makes matters worse. As Nancy Youssef of the Daily Beast recently tweeted that she “overheard” at the Pentagon, “Right now, we are Putin’s prison bitch.”

Russia’s military deployment in Syria is a strategic boon for the Shiite “Axis of Resistance” and its new partner, Russia. This resurgent axis was in part made possible by the absence of a credible U.S. Syria policy, but it will only be bolstered should Washington embrace Russia and Iran as its regional security partners. Already in the Middle East, there is a widely held perception that the U.S. has made this decision. No doubt, the administration will continue to insist that the Iran nuclear deal doesn’t signal a broader regional realignment. Should the U.S. tilt toward Russia and Iran persist, President Obama might find himself alongside Assad, Khamenei, Nasrallah and Putin on the next run of posters. More here.

At real odds, Obama administration vs. Putin:

NYT in part:

The Obama administration, by contrast, says its own airstrikes against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria can succeed only with a political transition that ends with Mr. Assad’s removal.

The administration’s position was ridiculed Monday by Sergey V. Lavrov, Russia’s foreign minister, who said the American airstrikes, which began more than a year ago, had done little militarily. In comments carried by Russia’s official Tass news agency, Mr. Lavrov said that even the Americans had acknowledged their faltering efforts to create a force of so-called moderate insurgents in Syria.

While Barack Obama talks about gun control and pushes a Strong Cities initiative through the United Nations”

From Politico in part: In 2014, Vian Dakhil’s stirring plea for international intervention helped inspire President Barack Obama to order airstrikes and launch a humanitarian effort to rescue thousands of Yazidi Iraqis who were trapped on a mountainside under assault by Islamic State.

A year later, Dakhil, one of two Yazidi members of the Iraqi parliament, says her people have been abandoned by Washington and the international community.

In an emotional, at times tearful, on-stage interview at POLITICO’s “Women Rule” event Wednesday morning in Washington, Dakhil described a full-blown humanitarian crisis — 420,000 Yazidis living in refugee camps in tents with mud floors, women and girls continuing to be kidnapped, 2,200 girls in captivity as sexual slaves, and survivors returning from the horror of ISIL captivity with no resources for psychological support. Thousands of orphans have no homes.

Dakhil, who is credited with saving many Yazidi women and girls from ISIL captivity, said she was not contacted by U.S. officials after the initial announcement. A letter to Michelle Obama received no response, she said.

Could it be that Bashir al Assad is now terrified of his long relationship with Iran and Vladimir Putin’s ride into Syria on his white steed to save Syria will turn into a wider conflict later between the Shiites and Sunnis in the region?

In part from DerSpiegel: Fear of his enemies was the primary reason for Bashar Assad’s call for help to Moscow. “But right after that came the fear of his friends,” says a Russian official who long worked in his country’s embassy in Damascus. The friend he refers to is Iran, the Syrian regime’s most important protector. “Assad and those around him are afraid of the Iranians,” the Russian says. Anger over the arrogance of the Iranians, who treat Syria like a colony, is also part of it, the Russian continues. Most of all, though, the Syrians “mistrust Tehran’s goals, for which Assad’s position of power may no longer be decisive. That is why the Syrians absolutely want us in the country.”

What the Russian diplomat, who wants to remain anonymous, has to say is a bit jarring at first. Without the Shiite auxiliaries from Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and Lebanon — whose recruitment and transfer is organized by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard — Assad’s rule would long since have come to an end. Yet his comments are complemented by a number of additional details that add up to an image of a behind-the-scenes power struggle — one which casts a new, scary light on the condition of the Syrian regime and on the country’s prospects as a whole.

The Iranian Revolutionary Guard has long planned and carried out the most important missions and operations of the Syrian regime. They were responsible, right down to the details, for the sporadically successful offensives in Aleppo in the north and Daraa in the south, which began in 2013. In Iran, the Revolutionary Guard is one of those groups intent on continuing the “Islamic Revolution” — the victory of Shiites over the Sunnis. They are a state within a state, one which owns several companies and is answerable only to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. President Hassan Rohani has no power over the Revolutionary Guard whatsoever.

Their goals go far beyond merely reestablishing the status quo in Syria. In early 2013, Hojatoleslam Mehdi Taeb, one of the planners behind Iran’s engagement in Syria, said: “Syria is the 35th province of Iran and it is a strategic province for us.” For several decades, the alliance between the Assads and Iran was a profitable one, particularly in opposition to the Iraq of Saddam Hussein, which long had the upper hand in the region. But today, Assad depends on Iran to remain in power, and Tehran is taking advantage of the situation. To read more from the Russian perspective, click here.