Thread: If Iran judges that the conflict in Armenia and Azerbaijan is creating any instability in Iran or stoking ethnic tensions, it will move quickly to secure a ceasefire via work with Ankara and Moscow based on the Astana model. Those talking about "Turkey vs. Iran" are wrong
Why are they wrong? Because the hidden deal between these countries, who may not always share interests, is no stoking tensions inside sovereign borders of the other. For instance Russia is wary of extremists, Turkey of PKK, Iran of ethnic tensions;
The idea that the conflict which Turkey encouraged between Azerbaijan and Armenia might be used in any way to weaken the Iran regime will stop immediately if Tehran feels this way through quick calls to Ankara and Moscow.
Ankara understands this and plans accordingly. Only some people in the West think there is some mythical idea of Ankara helping the US against the Iran regime, i.e that Turkey supports US sanctions and maximum pressure...no Turkey does not. Ankara works with Iran.
While Ankara, Iran and Russia may partition Syria into areas of influence...when it comes to internal borders...there can be no acceptance of any of these big states meddling inside eachother borders...same with relations with China.
Tehran messaging already is concern over the battles near the border. While some suggested Azerbaijan would be able to take areas of Nagorna-Karabakh or even move along the Iran border towards exclave near Turkey, Iran would be concerned about this.
The correct analysis that Turkey, Iran and Russia are the emerging powerful states is accurate and the era of 10 years of recent wars; or even 30 years of instability and global war on terror; and US hegemony is changing...as powerful states return.
The powerful states share common interests, they want to co-opt extremist groups and use them, contract them, make them proxies, but they don't want chaos and instability. They want to move in to create spheres of influence or frozen conflicts in weak states
They want to stop weak states from spreading extremism, they learned over the years that weak, ungoverned, unstable areas, spread instability. Turkey's obsession now with PKK was a result of seeing that in Syria in 2014-2015. Russia from Chechnya's lessons, Iran from various.
The goal now is for powerful states to grab up areas in other states, like Russia does in Georgia-Ukraine, or Turkey in N. Syria and Libya or Iran in Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon. This is how things work. No one will be allowed, by Tehran, to destabilize Iran, certainly not Turkey
Why do we know this. Because Iran also wanted to make sure there are no more Kurdish groups carrying out attacks in Iran, and it sought to stop PJAK and then also KDPI etc. It did that also through pressure and deals abroad.
The idea that the US, stretched as it is with various issue...could use the Azerbaijan-Armenia conflict to somehow fan flames inside Iran of protest is unlikely. Turkey won't wan that...Tehran will work to make sure it doesn't happen. And Azerbaijan is on the border, not far away
I always get complaints from Ankara analysts who claim "no, Seth, you're wrong, Ankara is hostile to Iran"...but it isn't. There are no statements by the foreign minister etc. In fact Ankara understands Iran and can work with it and has a way of doing that. It hedges.
Ankara is hostile to Israel, hostile to France...it knows how to put out statements attacking numerous countries, from Holland to Germany, Austria, India, UAE, etc...it almost never critiques Iran.
The IDF released a report on the failure of October 7 to defend Kibbutz Nir Oz. The report is worse than expected. It shows the IDF didn't defend this community at all, and only arrived at 13:10, more than six and a half hours after the attack began. Hamas and other terrorists had already come and left, they had complete control of the place and could do basically whatever they wanted. There was a small local security team from the community, but it was overwhelmed.
The small community was massacred; 47 people murdered, 76 kidnapped.
Jpost; "October 7 probe: IDF only arrived in Nir Oz after Hamas terrorists left because it was 'far away'" jpost.com/israel-news/ar…
The Golani Brigade's 51st Battalion was defending the sector, but it was understrength. The IDF completely failed to plan for or even apparently think about how to defend this community. It's strange because one assumes the IDF wouldn't have behaved this way in the north or the West Bank. Something about Hamas in Gaza cast a spell over Israel and its defenses such that this border was almost treated like a peace border.
According to Ynet "The battalion had 182 combat soldiers and 57 support personnel in the northern Eshkol region, prepared for an infiltration scenario from a single point without warning. Near their base, Judy and Gadi Weinstein were preparing for their 6:06 a.m. morning walk, unaware they would be Nir Oz’s first victims that day."
Articles like this illustrate the corrosive nature of how media use the term “disinformation” as a stand in for actually covering things on the ground or reporting what happened
Here you have an entire article that admits 800 people were killed, the article claims that some old videos were repackaged and some people falsely reported that others were killed…but where is the evidence that the “disinformation” led to “intensified” violence? Do they mean the information that was provided to SNA-backed militias who went on a rampage in Latakia? No. They don’t even mention them
The one place that rumors and propaganda did influence killing was in the attacks by the militias in response to the pro-Assad attacks. But this article doesn’t seem to unpack that or discuss it. It doesn’t even seem to interview people on the ground. Because western media have been encouraged to discuss “disinformation” as a stand in for actual reporting
This became their main talking point the day before the Bibas children were buried. This is what these people came down to.
No words.
Note, they don’t say they will do the minute of silence, they just want to add the whataboutism. There is a reason they trotted him out the day before the burial to do this.
Never forget
A quick thought on this. Where was this talking point on October 8 when there were 38 dead children as a result of the Hamas massacre? What was Daniel Levy's talking point on that day?
The thing is that on October 8 you don't see this talking point about a minute of silence. It's only a day before the Bibas funeral that they trotted this out. And note they don't include the other 38 children killed on October 7. It's all about doing "whataboutism" because the Bibas funeral is in the spotlight. For a year they never mentioned the Bibas family, only now, in order to downplay and whatabout the tragedy.
For many years there was a subset of critics of Israel who would say things like "I want Israel to reflect my liberal/progressive values." And they expected to take part in a discussion where reasonable people would say "well I can understand that, let's debate Israel's policies, I understand why you feel uncomfortable with some of them." They posed as being inside the tent of Israel discussions, merely objecting to Israel's "policies." And they were taken at face value by moderates and centrists.
Some of these types of people would even come to Israel, they'd spend most of their time with Palestinians, or at unrecognized beduin villages, or supporting African refugees. They posed as just wanting Israelis to support their progressive causes.
Then came October 7 and these folk were all silent. They never posted one photo of hostages, never had any empathy for Shani Louk or Naama Levy, they never wanted their "social justice" faith to mention the hostages...their "social justice Passover" never mentioned those held in Gaza. It never mentioned the Bibas children.
What is further surprising about kidnappinig and murder of the Bibas children, and now the decision by Hamas to lie about returning the body of Shiri Bibas, the mother, is the way Israel has always been surprised at every turn of events, always reacting.
Israeli officials have vowed to avenge the latest Hamas action; but the fact is that since Oct. 7 Israel has always been reacting. Israel was taken by surprise by the Hamas attack. Shiri, Yarden, Kfir and Ariel Bibas were kidnapped from Nir Oz.
The family were alive when they were kidnapped. Israel now believes that the children were killed in November. However, that means that during October the baby Kfir and toddler Ariel were alive. Between October 7 and 27 four adults were released by Hamas; two American women and two elderly women. However there was seemingly no priority put on getting the Bibas children out of Gaza. Why?
One thing that has interested me a little since the hostage deal began, is the lack of interest in the freed hostages or the victims such as the Bibas children, among self-defined progressive Jewish circles in the US. I mean groups such as rabbis involved in human rights or academics or social justice activist types and commentators. It's a small, niche group of outspoken people, but symbolic.
What I see is a collective silence from them, a decision apparently to never post images of the Bibas children, never post images of women hostages or Hamas parading emaciated male hostages. Basically anything related to hostages who are Jewish and Israeli is considered something they won't discuss or empathize with or post about.
It's hard to quantify because most of these people have left this platform but some of them still post elsewhere and you can look at their posts since mid-January and see. Is it a collective decision since Oct. 7 in most of these groups to never mention Jewish victims of Hamas crimes?