Washington Heads Toward “Permitting Military Cooperation” with Russia Only on US Terms

In-depth Report:

During months of US/Russia talks on conflict resolution in Syria, Washington consistently undermined Moscow’s good faith efforts, breaching promises made, violating SC Res. 2254 terms – unanimously adopted in December 2015, calling for ceasefire and diplomatic conflict resolution.

In October 2016, the Defense Department ceased military contacts with Russia in Syria. Information exchanges stopped.

State Department spokesman admiral John Kirby said “(t)he United States is suspending its participation in bilateral channels with Russia that were established to sustain the cessation of hostilities.” He lied, claiming Moscow “failed to live up to its own commitments…”

A Russian Foreign Ministry statement said “in pursuit of regime change in Damascus, Washington…forge(d) an alliance with hardened terrorists…”

House members want US military cooperation with Russia hamstrung, inserting a provision in the FY 2017 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) – overwhelmingly approved on December 2 by a 375 – 34 vote, Senate passage assured, perhaps with minor revisions, followed by Obama signing it into law.

Orwellian anti-Russian Section 1236 bans the Defense Department from pursuing “bilateral military-to-military cooperation between the governments of the United States and Russia” – unless Moscow “cease(s) its occupation of Ukrainian territory and its aggressive activities that threaten the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine and members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.”

DOD must “certify” to Congress that Russia “is abiding by the terms of and taking steps in support of the Minsk Protocols regarding a ceasefire in eastern Ukraine.”

Fact: No Russian occupation of Ukraine exists – nor “aggressive activities” threatening Kiev, NATO countries or any others.

Fact: Russia alone strictly observes Minsk principles. Other so-called Normandy Quartet countries France, Germany and Ukraine systematically breach them, US pressure assuring it.

A congressional waiver may be granted provided “national interest(s)” are served, without further elaboration.

Obama’s tenure was marked by increasing tensions with Russia, risking direct confrontation by his hostile acts – including by signing into law the FY 2017 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) when it reaches his desk.

Congressional action is aimed at stymying Trump’s efforts to normalize ties with Russia, including both countries cooperating in combating terrorism in Syria – if he follows through on what he suggested while campaigning.

Will he observe what Section 1236 mandates or seek a waiver to cooperate with Russia in the “national interest?”

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected]

His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.


Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research


Articles by: Stephen Lendman

About the author:

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected] His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III." http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com. Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network. It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.

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]

www.globalresearch.ca 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]