Israel’s Latest Strikes in Syria Prove that the US-Russia-Israel Jerusalem National Security Summit Was a Success

There’s no more convincing proof that last week’s historic National Security Summit in Jerusalem between Russia, “Israel”, and the US was a success than the self-professed “Jewish State’s” latest anti-Iranian strikes in Syria, which were more than likely approved  by Moscow in advance as part of its regional “balancing” strategy in pursuit of a “New Detente”.

Israel” carried out several strikes against what media reports allege were IRGC bases in Syria around midnight on 1 July, defying popular expectations that this wouldn’t happen ever again after Russia gave some very high-profile but nevertheless misleading statements about its supposedly “allied” commitment to Iran the week prior. The historic National Security Advisor Summit in Jerusalem between Russia, “Israel”, and the US was widely described as a failure after Moscow defended Tehran’s military presence in the Arab Republic and reaffirmed that the two are “allies”, but that doesn’t tell the full story because Russian Security Council Secretary Patrushev was only talking about their anti-terrorist cooperation in Syria and didn’t mean anything more broadly than that.

The same goes for the Russian Foreign Ministry’s envoy to Asian countries and in particular the presidential advisor on Afghanistan Zamir Kabulov’s promise a few days later that Iran “won’t be alone” if the US attacks it. Alt-Media interpreted this through its members’ typical wishful thinking perspective to mean that Russia was implying a direct military intervention against the US in support of Iran if a conflict were to break out, when in reality he was most likely talking about the political and moral support that the rest of the world would extend to the Islamic Republic in that scenario. Shortly after, a Russian official told Sputnik that “we are open to discussions” with Iran about selling it the S-400s, which was also wrongly reported in the outlet’s own headline as “Russia ready to deliver S-400 to Iran” when it literally only signaled its interest in starting talks about this.

The combination of Patrushev, Kabulov, and the military-technical official’s statements created the false perception that Russia would militarily defend its Iranian “ally”, which is why many people were so surprised when “Israel” just carried out several strikes against its forces in Syria. Not only that, but the S-300s once again failed to respond, confirming that they’re just status symbols worshiped by those who suffer from a “savior complex”. The latest attacks were particularly painful for those who sincerely thought that Russia would prevent this from happening since some of them targeted the Homs Governorate close to where the S-300s are reportedly located in neighboring Hama Governorate’s nearby city of Masyaf, sending the clear-cut message that Moscow won’t let them be used against “Putinyahu’s Rusrael“.

As the shock of what happened begins to set in, the Alt-Media Community would do well to remember that none other than Bibi himself spilled the beans about what was about to happen just days before the strikes took place when he said that “all of us (Russia, “Israel”, and the US) agree on the end goal of getting Iran out of Syria” when briefing his compatriots on the outcome of the National Security Advisor Summit. Many people mocked him at the time and dismissed his comment as nothing more than Zionist boasting, but he was actually telling the truth in hindsight as proven by the fact that Russia once again  “passively facilitated” “Israel’s” anti-Iranian strikes in Syria, shattering the worldview of those who fell for Moscow’s messaging in the days prior. In fact, one can’t help but wonder whether that said messaging was designed to cover up a deal that it struck.

To elaborate, the three quoted Russian officials were uncharacteristically enthusiastic about their support of Iran, which should have immediately been a dead-giveaway to keen observers that something was up. Furthermore, the fact that Alt-Media didn’t report on the entirety of Patrushev’s comments from that event, especially about how “Russia puts special attention on ensuring Israel’s security“, should have been another sign that a perception management operation was in progress. More than likely, Russia wanted to capitalize on the outpouring of global support for Iran after it downed an American drone earlier that week and misportray itself as the Islamic Republic’s loyal “ally” in order to redirect some of the sympathy towards its Mideast policy as well, all of which would make “Israel’s” forthcoming strikes all the more unexpected.

It’s doubtful that Iranian decision makers fell for this perception management operation that was probably mostly targeting the general audience at large and not the strategic one in the Islamic Republic, but then again, Tehran still can’t seem to accept that India has turned against it so it’s theoretically possible that it also didn’t see this coming either. That said, many Iranians have reportedly been killed over nearly the past four years since Russia militarily intervened in Syria and began to “passively facilitate” “Israel’s” strikes there, so it would be strange for them to think that this would change after what Patrushev said at the historic Jerusalem Summit about ensuring “Israel’s” security, which is nothing more than a euphemism for continuing to allow it to bomb the IRGC in Syria.

Given what just took place, there’s no doubt that the National Security Advisor Summit in Jerusalem was a success in more ways than one. Not only did Russia apparently approve — if not coordinate — “Israel’s” latest strikes (and likely the many more that will occur in the coming future) as part of its regional “balancing” strategy aimed at “passively facilitating” Iran’s dignified but “phased withdrawal” from Syria as a quid pro quo for clinching a “New Detente” with the US, but Moscow’s messaging strategy also succeeded in managing international perceptions and obscuring its behind-the-scenes role in the latest attacks. Altogether, all of this works out very well for Netanyahu’s upcoming re-election campaign and it’s predicted that he’ll continue striking the IRGC in Syria with Putin’s tacit approval in the run-up to September’s vote.


Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This article was originally published on Eurasia Future.

Andrew Korybko is an American Moscow-based political analyst specializing in the relationship between the US strategy in Afro-Eurasia, China’s One Belt One Road global vision of New Silk Road connectivity, and Hybrid Warfare. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Featured image is from @Ibra_Joudeh/Twitter

Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research

Articles by: Andrew Korybko

About the author:

Andrew Korybko is an American Moscow-based political analyst specializing in the relationship between the US strategy in Afro-Eurasia, China’s One Belt One Road global vision of New Silk Road connectivity, and Hybrid Warfare. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected] contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]