Syria in 2017 (April-December)

[OUTLAW 09]

Azor...now do you finally realize just how correct I and CrowBat have been? We critiqued Obama ME FP because he did not understand what was actually ongoing inside Syria and Trump has no idea what the heck he is doing for any FP.

This will now drive FSA into the open arms of HTS/AQ and the US will be ground into the dust of Syria, Iraq and ME for the coming decade as Is reverts back to it's basic roots, guerrilla warfare and working with disillusioned Sunni's about US bombs raining on them and the high number of Shia killings of Sunni civilians.

Trump just provided Putin a major win and the question is why?

WINNERS, Assad, Putin and Khamenei.

LOSSERS Trump and DoD and DoS and Us allies

Trump ends CIA arms support for anti-Assad Syria rebels: U.S. officials
http://reut.rs/2uKe9Jx

[Azor]

Azor...now do you finally realize just how correct I and CrowBat have been? We critiqued Obama ME FP because he did not understand what was actually ongoing inside Syria and Trump has no idea what the heck he is doing for any FP.

This will now drive FSA into the open arms of HTS/AQ and the US will be ground into the dust of Syria, Iraq and ME for the coming decade as Is reverts back to it's basic roots, guerrilla warfare and working with disillusioned Sunni's about US bombs raining on them and the high number of Shia killings of Sunni civilians.

Trump just provided Putin a major win and the question is why?

WINNERS, Assad, Putin and Khamenei.

LOSSERS Trump and DoD and DoS and Us allies

Trump ends CIA arms support for anti-Assad Syria rebels: U.S. officials
http://reut.rs/2uKe9Jx

Outlaw,

This announcement is disappointing to be sure, but it is important not to exaggerate its impact or to ignore the current dynamics of the war:

• As CrowBat concurred, I would suggest that the end of Timber Sycamore may well ease U.S. restrictions on GCC, Turkish and Jordanian support for the Free Syrian Army
• The announcement could be a public relations ploy, as another secret CIA program may replace it
• The FSA elements in the Turkish and Coalition (SDF) salients will continue to receive support as well as protection from pro-Assad forces
• Turkey can independently support FSA elements in northwestern Syria while Jordan can do the same for those in southern Syria
• The rebellion is a melee in northwestern Syria as rebels fight one another and pro-Assad forces
• Timber Sycamore was clearly not enough for the FSA to survive both pro-Assad forces and Islamist units
• In the absence of a full U.S. commitment to regime change and reconstruction in Syria, the operation could only continue to keep Syria ablaze
• Pro-Assad forces will not be able to take the Coalition or Turkish salients

We will have to see how the war develops over the coming weeks, and whether social media can keep us abreast of the FSA's operations.

[Azor]

From Omar Sabbour on Facebook:

1) The end of the CIA "vetting" program of "arming rebels"

For those who have closely followed Syria over the years, they will know of course that the CIA programme has not been dictated by actually providing weapons to the rebels directly (groups which received weapons directly from the US tended to have agreed not to use them against Assad, such as the SDF, New Syrian Army, Mou'tasem Brigade, Hamza Division), but in "co-coordinating" (i.e. controlling) the arms supply to them coming from other parties (i.e. Qatar, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and private parties - references for this can be found at the bottom [1]). This control has been exercised via two main "Operation Centres" - the MOC in Jordan and the MOM in Turkey - and has taken the form of determining the quantity and quality of weapons which are allowed to go in (for instance advanced weaponry are either restricted - such as anti-tank missiles - or altogether blockaded - such as anti-aircraft missiles; whilst the flow of regular weaponry and ammunition varies according to events and strategic interests on the ground) and which groups receive them.

Of course the CIA and Jordanian intelligence had already been banning (the already previously restricted [2]) arms going into the South for the purpose of anti-Assad operations for years (https://mkaradjis.wordpress.com/…/us...n-demand-sou…/), whilst in the North the CIA had restricted allowing arms to rebel operations even against ISIS [3] - though the degree of US control here had been much less than in the south, as the US had been circumvented more by Turkey (whilst Turkey always pressured the US to allow in an effective supply of weaponry to the rebels, by contrast Jordan had an effectively identical position to the US vis a vis Syria: i.e. supporting the survival of the opposition but not empowering it to overthrow Assad).
What this news piece means, in other words, is that the US is going to try and institute a total blockade of any rebel weaponry going into north or south Syria. This essentially means a return to the US policy before the CIA program (i.e. 2011-late 2013), which consisted of "unofficially" (i.e. not through the MOC or MOM) seizing even light weaponry shipments - this CIA policing policy at the time was described as "choking" the Syrian rebel supply [4].

In combination with what appears to be Turkey's selling out of the rebellion, this is essentially merely a "publicisation" of the undeclared US-Russian-Turkish arrangement aimed at ending the armed resistance to Assad which had which begun with the fall of Aleppo (when the US actually bombed rebel areas of the city during the siege, with US officials even justifying the Russian bombardment - whilst Turkey blocked arms supplies going in during the siege [5]). Supporters of Turkey need understand that whilst Turkey did indeed want to empower the rebels militarily to overthrow Assad (unlike Jordan), it has never been brave enough to cross the US red-lines which were explicitly against this policy [6].

2) The capture of Mosul by the Iraqi government

Warning to Syrian groups: With the capture of Mosul it is very likely that you will find the Iraqi government reshifting its full efforts to helping Assad in Syria. Of course, there are already about a dozen or so core Iraqi PMU groups which are part of the Iraqi Military (not Army, which is a noteworthy distincion) and and are salaried by the central government, but have not had so-called official "permission" to fight there by the Prime Minister Abadi (although obviously the permission is very much present by the fact that they're paid and armed by the government) who have been fighting in Syria for a long time. A few weeks ago I read that one of the PMU groups (who hadn't yet intervened in Syria) "asked Abadi" for permission to do so. As so many others have already done so without waiting for "official permission", the fact that this group has "asked" raises the notion that the Iraqi government might "officially" adopt intervention in Syria. As a result you might very well have much more PMU units (and one should know that there are a lot more of those with tens of thousands of more fighters than the ones already in Syria) who've been tied down in Iraq against ISIS coming to fight in Syria - and these units would likely be backed much more directly by the central government, security forces and Army (i.e. even if the regular Army divisions don't actively cross the border into Syria, they will likely provide the PMUs with other forms of support, intelligence, etc.).

With Trump's policy direction of the effective declaration that the US will seek to block any external weapons supplies to the rebels, it seems very likely that there won't be any pretense of US opposition to the central government's "official" acceptance of intervention in Syria. Of course this "official" distinction is largely irrelevant as the Iraqi PMUs are very much backed by the Iraqi government in their Syrian invasion, but the point is that the abandonment of the official pretense will likely be accompanied with a far-escalated and directed support to Assad coming from Iraq.

Footnotes:

[1]
https://www.alaraby.co.uk/…/anti-air...iles-could-be…
http://web.archive.org/…/12/cia-syri...n_3912583.html

[2]
https://eaworldview.com/…/syria-spec...-saudi-confl…/
http://www.nytimes.com/…/citing-us-f...limit-aid-to-…
http://syrianobserver.com/…/The_U_S_...g_Syrian_Oppo…
https://www.pri.org/…/why-are-us-mad...k-missiles-sh…
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…/russ...ention-in-s_b…

[3]
http://syrianobserver.com/…/The_U_S_...g_Syrian_Oppo…

[4]
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/…/cia-cho...-weapon-suppl…
http://web.archive.org/…/report-cia-...s-groups-eff…/
http://www.upi.com/…/CIA-allegedly-o...3401344880820/

[5]
https://www.facebook.com/SyriaSolida...32620766438901
https://www.facebook.com/SyriaSolida...33937461307236
http://uk.businessinsider.com/defens...nt-nusra-alep…

[6]
http://foreignpolicy.com/…/state-dep...re-never-goi…/

[Azor]

By Faysal Itani at DefenseOne

Introduction:

Where the insurgency is concerned, Trump and Obama have plenty in common.

This week, the Trump administration reportedly cancelled a long-running covert program to support vetted Syrian rebels in the war against the regime of Bashar al-Assad. While this move has provoked a small outcry among Assad’s opponents, the development itself is far from surprising. Furthermore, it is incorrect, as some have insisted, to view the cancellation as a gratuitous concession to Russia—adecision like this, which aligns with years of deliberate U.S. strategy and Trump’sown stated goals, cannot be considered a concession. It is almost certainly true that Trump hopes this decision will make Russia more cooperative on ceasefires between the regime and the insurgency. But if that does not happen or if it fails to pacify Syria—a likely outcome—this would not alter an already-dismal strategic situation for the Syrian opposition, one that may well be acceptable to the United States.

The Trump administration’s decision to end this program represents the logical endpoint of years of evolution in U.S. policy. While the effort was conceived under Barack Obama, it was always at odds with America’s broader goals—a tension that Trump has long recognized and is now acting upon.

[davidbfpo]

The April 2017 Sarin CW attack on Khan Sheikhoun features in sixty posts on the Forum, mainly in the Syrian threads and the Russian Info Ops thread.

Thanks to a "lurker" for the pointer to commentary by Eliot Higgins @ Bellingcat, which starts with:

Following the July 4th, 2017 publication of the OPCW fact-finding mission (FFM) report on the April 4th, 2017 Khan Sheikhoun Sarin attack in Syria, questions were raised about claims made by the veteran journalist Seymour Hersh in his June 25th, 2017 article in Welt, “Trump‘s Red Line“. The OPCW FFM report flatly contradicted claims made in Hersh’s article, namely how a Syrian SU-24 supposedly fired a precision-guided munition at a Jihadi command and control center in the north of Khan Sheikhoun, with the resulting explosion inadvertently releasing toxic gases from “medicines and chlorine-based decontaminants” stored in the basement of the building, along with unspecified weapons and munitions.
Hersh’s claim contradicted the OPCW FFM report, which stated that Sarin had been detected in environmental samples and in tests on the victims of the attack. Not only that, but Hersh’s reporting also contradicted claims made by the US, French, Syrian, and Russian governments.

Link:https://www.bellingcat.com/news/mena...ite-know-move/

[Azor]

By: Bassem Mroue, The Associated Press
http://www.militarytimes.com/flashpo...to-government/

BEIRUT — A small number of U.S.-backed rebels have defected and joined government forces south of the country days after the U.S. announced an end to a CIA program that backed opposition fighters, Syrian opposition activists said Saturday.

The defection of at least four rebels came after The Washington Post reported that the White House has decided to halt the CIA supply-and-equip program for Syrian rebels.

U.S. President Donald Trump essentially confirmed the existence of the program and its cancellation Monday night when he lashed out at The Washington Post. The president tweeted that the newspaper “fabricated the facts on my ending massive, dangerous, and wasteful payments to Syrian rebels fighting (Syrian President Bashar) Assad.”

The defection also came as Col. Ryan Dillon, the spokesman for the U.S.-led coalition fighting the Islamic State group, told CNN this week that “the coalition supports only those forces committed to fighting” the Islamic State group...

[CrowBat]

Azor...now do you finally realize just how correct I and CrowBat have been? We critiqued Obama ME FP because he did not understand what was actually ongoing inside Syria and Trump has no idea what the heck he is doing for any FP.

Meanwhile, I would 'upgrade' this thesis to: 'he (and other Western cleptocrac... erm... 'governments') acted intentionally'.

Just like in Libya of 2011, and right from the start, the idea of most of our governments - and almost all the media - here in the West was that the uprising in Syria is one of 'al-Qaida against a secular government'.

Ever since, these governments and all the possible talking heads - and there are true armies of these, ranging from the likes of Oblablas and Steinmeiers, via all the Landis', Tamimis, Listers etc. - are tearing themselves and each other apart (and everybody who happens to pass by) with new 'revelations' about 'al-Qaida in Syria' and whatever else. Primarily because that's all they were ever interested in seeing in this conflict; sadly, also because that was of crucial importance for Israel, too (then, a democratic Syria was just the last thing all of them were ever curious to see, just like a democratic Libya... or even such Venezuela). For this purpose, out of an unimportant and anything else than 'influential' presence, they created a temporary parallel universe through exaggerating and pointing out - de-facto _advertising_ a few thugs. And then they continued repeating the same 'song' - until this became reality, first in the case of the Daesh, then in the case of this JAN/HTS comedy.

I'm no conspiracy theoretician - and feel free to call me 'naive' and 'idealist' as much as you like - but, if this is not reminding of well-known campaigns 'pro' US food- and tobacco-industries from the 1970s and 1980s (all of which where wholeheartedly supported by top experts from Harvard University - who, BTW - were all paid for by the same food- and tobacco-industries)... I do not know what else might ever do so.

All of this is now 'past tense'. Present times is that a pluralist revolution was successfully suppressed and replaced by gangs of extremists of all possible sorts, and that no solution for the stinking pile of BS so skilfully created in Syria is in sight.

The war can thus go on.

Congratulations everybody.

[Azor]

Meanwhile, I would 'upgrade' this thesis to: 'he (and other Western cleptocrac... erm... 'governments') acted intentionally'.

Just like in Libya of 2011, and right from the start, the idea of most of our governments - and almost all the media - here in the West was that the uprising in Syria is one of 'al-Qaida against a secular government'.

Ever since, these governments and all the possible talking heads - and there are true armies of these, ranging from the likes of Oblablas and Steinmeiers, via all the Landis', Tamimis, Listers etc. - are tearing themselves and each other apart (and everybody who happens to pass by) with new 'revelations' about 'al-Qaida in Syria' and whatever else. Primarily because that's all they were ever interested in seeing in this conflict; sadly, also because that was of crucial importance for Israel, too (then, a democratic Syria was just the last thing all of them were ever curious to see, just like a democratic Libya... or even such Venezuela). For this purpose, out of an unimportant and anything else than 'influential' presence, they created a temporary parallel universe through exaggerating and pointing out - de-facto _advertising_ a few thugs. And then they continued repeating the same 'song' - until this became reality, first in the case of the Daesh, then in the case of this JAN/HTS comedy.

I'm no conspiracy theoretician - and feel free to call me 'naive' and 'idealist' as much as you like - but, if this is not reminding of well-known campaigns 'pro' US food- and tobacco-industries from the 1970s and 1980s (all of which where wholeheartedly supported by top experts from Harvard University - who, BTW - were all paid for by the same food- and tobacco-industries)... I do not know what else might ever do so.

All of this is now 'past tense'. Present times is that a pluralist revolution was successfully suppressed and replaced by gangs of extremists of all possible sorts, and that no solution for the stinking pile of BS so skilfully created in Syria is in sight.

The war can thus go on.

Congratulations everybody.

On the contrary, the relevant appointed public officials and P3 analysts are more than capable of understanding the nuances of each situation and recommending appropriate policies. However, the elected officials and representatives, the mainstream media and the electorate itself, are incapable of doing either.

The portrayal of the entire Syrian Arab rebellion as one of aggressive Sunni Arab Muslim supremacism on the order of Al Qaeda and Daesh is clearly false; so too the lionizing of the Kurds and the conflating of the KRG with the PKK/PYD. As for Assad and his allies, one’s opinion of the rebellion should not determine one’s opinion of his regime or its crimes both at war and at peace. Long before 2011, the Assad dynasty had acquired offensive chemical weapons and had attempted to develop nuclear ones as well, and these capabilities were far more threatening to the West and its interests than any Syrian rebels. The threats from Assad’s allies Iran and Hezbollah were well-known until recently, when certain governments decided to engage with the former and partner with both.

Despite all of these lies, errors and omissions, the facts are that:

• The secular/moderate rebels are not capable of winning the war, even with Turkish support
  
• Only the U.S. has the ability to oust foreign pro-Assad forces from Syria

A U.S. occupation and reconstruction of Syria would require:

• The forcible expulsion of more than 30,000 pro-Assad foreign forces
  
• Disarmament and internment of at least 200,000 Syrian combatants
  
• Clashes with Iranian and Russian forces with wider implications
  
• An occupation force of at least 410,000, and probably closer to 2,050,000*
  
• An additional 400,000 to 600,000 armed local auxiliaries*
  
• 4-7 years of occupation and reconstruction**
  
• An ongoing U.S. presence in Syria for more than 50 years as well as a deep bilateral relationship**

The Syrian Revolution began to eat its children years ago, as the revolutions in Libya, Egypt, Iran and Algeria already have. To this day, the center-left and left-wing revolutionaries who helped overthrow the Shah in Iran – and who faced much worse repression under Khomeini – propagate the myth that the CIA installed both leaders. Why? Because that myth is easier to swallow than the truth that the revolution was perverted from within. Contemporary Russians can be found who argued that Western financiers backed the Communist and National Socialist seizures of power in Russia and Germany, respectively.

You will recall that the Russian Revolution was incredibly “pluralist”, which was one of its problems. Note also that the more successful English Revolution of 1642 was not finally resolved until 1689 in England, and 1775 in the United States…

Like it or not, the Free Syrian Army needed overwhelming foreign support to win the war and then win the peace, and they did not fail to win due to a conspiracy hatched in Washington, Tel Aviv or Berlin.





*Based upon the forces committed to Operation Banner and the Second Chechen War
**Based upon the occupations of Germany and Japan

[CrowBat]

There is a nice verb in German, for which there is no translation to English.

It's called 'zerreden'.

It's the best description of such 'explanations' about Syria, like your's.

Example?

First let Assad detain and disappear 60.000-120.000 peaceful, secular activists; congratulate him for 'reforms' like letting 5,000 Islamists out of his jails, where these were extremised; then let Qatar, Kuwait and Turkey sponsor extremist gangs organized by these while doing whatever is possible to curb foreign support for secular armed groups (including taking away all of their MANPADs)...add plenty of such nonsense like 'Turkey is supporting moderate Syrian insurgents', 'CIA is doing the same too'...preferably while establishing a close alliance with Marxist/Maoist terrorist group that's completely foreign to the country in question - and then declare the entire affair for 'no matter of national interest', before, finally, concluding it just couldn't work.

Then, sigh, fighting a war for... well, gauging by Afghanistan: meanwhile it's 40+ years and there's no end in sight... is, what: 'cheaper'?

Than what?

(Disclaimer: and of course, there's no conspiracy; then any similarities to earlier, well-known and well-documented cases - are pure coincidence.)

[Azor]

There is a nice verb in German, for which there is no translation to English.

It's called 'zerreden'.

It's the best description of such 'explanations' about Syria, like your's.

Example?

First let Assad detain and disappear 60.000-120.000 peaceful, secular activists; congratulate him for 'reforms' like letting 5,000 Islamists out of his jails, where these were extremised; then let Qatar, Kuwait and Turkey sponsor extremist gangs organized by these while doing whatever is possible to curb foreign support for secular armed groups (including taking away all of their MANPADs)...add plenty of such nonsense like 'Turkey is supporting moderate Syrian insurgents', 'CIA is doing the same too'...preferably while establishing a close alliance with Marxist/Maoist terrorist group that's completely foreign to the country in question - and then declare the entire affair for 'no matter of national interest', before, finally, concluding it just couldn't work.

Then, sigh, fighting a war for... well, gauging by Afghanistan: meanwhile it's 40+ years and there's no end in sight... is, what: 'cheaper'?

Than what?

(Disclaimer: and of course, there's no conspiracy; then any similarities to earlier, well-known and well-documented cases - are pure coincidence.)

There are two words in English that may still have some currency in your stomping grounds: Western betrayal.

If we must still suffer hearing about the incomparable bravery of a handful of people with clandestine printing presses in Copenhagen and Brussels, and about how the Free French Forces were the fourth-largest of the Allies in 1945, then I suggest you get used to hearing about how the YPG fighters are liberal, democratic and pluralistic heroes.

Firstly, where did you arrive at this figure? Is it pre-Civil War? Even the lower bound would be more than four times higher than the non-political prison population. Assad was not “congratulated” for detaining some 200,000 people during the course of the war and murdering more than 10,000 of them.

Secondly, where do Saudi Arabia and Jordan fit in among the foreign sponsors? You are actually confirming my argument that direct U.S. intervention was necessary rather than “leading from behind”. One can infer that given the lessons of Operation Cyclone, the U.S. objective was never to establish a strong, liberal democratic state in Syria, but to set it ablaze and make it ungovernable by Assad and Khamenei. If the objective was the latter, then Operation Timber Sycamore was the most efficient means of doing so.

Thirdly, the primary Western interest in the Syrian Civil War is preventing spillover, including Islamist terrorism. The PKK/PYD has made itself very useful in that regard, by establishing a truce of sorts with Assad, and fighting Daesh. Of course, we will reap the whirlwind of an ethnic war for Kurdish independence, a political struggle for leadership of the Kurds whether independent or not, continued sectarian war between Sunni and Shia, and a struggle between the unitary states in question and the centrifugal forces of autonomy and outright secession.

As Americans made clear in 1918 and 1945, they care little for unfinished business so long as they are protected by two great oceans. As the British learned over a period of centuries, dabbling in “offshore balancing” not only worsens the carnage and destruction, but it usually opens the gates to the next existential threat.

As for Afghanistan, “victory” is possible so long as the definition of that victory is restricted. There will be no strong and friendly state in Afghanistan (there never was a strong Afghan state to begin with), but there can be an autonomous client region in the north, not unlike the KRG in Iraq.

Lastly, none of your points alter the fact that the liberation of Syria and its reconstitution as a liberal democracy, would have required a major U.S. national commitment on the order of those it has made to France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Taiwan and South Korea. You will note that the Special Operations Executive or its post-1945 iterations did not liberate Europe from either of its 1939 occupiers.

I would enjoy seeing the relative success in Tunisia be replicated beyond its borders, but it may well be short-lived and due to unique local factors.

[davidbfpo]

External intervention in a civil war is never easy.

Syria is no exception, sadly for its people there is little prospect of peace after over six years of war (Wiki refers to the start as March 15, 2011). It is easy to foresee the Syrian diaspora being quite large (bigger than the Palestinian) and with "camps" scattered around its periphery.

Once the Assad regime decided to bludgeon the protestors the die was cast. I do not think there was ever a chance the regime would reform itself. There was a potent "witches cauldron", with a fair amount of external advice and training. Having "kept the lid" on protests and repressing the Homs / Hama revolt in 1982, why would it think the trusted, reliable methods wouldn't work once more?

Yes the "West" has an interest in the region, Syria was rather low down the list of priorities. The USA's interest had a large complicating factor, the defence of Israel - I do find it curious how careful and guarded Israel has been, almost as if the conflict suited it's interests.

Were the policies followed by the USA wise, let alone practical? I am unsure if other Western countries had much impact on the USA, with the exception of France.

Was there a "golden hour / day /month" when external intervention could have ended the civil war? No.

[Azor]

External intervention in a civil war is never easy.

No, it isn’t, but by the same token, few civil wars have occurred without external intervention.

The Syrian Civil War is hopelessly intertwined with the Iraqi Civil War as well as the other anti-authoritarian popular uprisings throughout the Arab world. It is as much a Gordian knot in our time, as the Thirty Years War was for 17th Century Europe.

Once the Assad regime decided to bludgeon the protestors the die was cast. I do not think there was ever a chance the regime would reform itself. There was a potent "witches cauldron", with a fair amount of external advice and training. Having "kept the lid" on protests and repressing the Homs / Hama revolt in 1982, why would it think the trusted, reliable methods wouldn't work once more?

I disagree that the repressions of 1979-1982 informed Assad’s course of action in 2011. The former uprising was largely a militant Islamist one led by the Muslim Brotherhood whereas the latter uprising was peaceful, popular and anti-authoritarian. Whereas Hafez al-Assad could rely upon the Soviets and other allies to prevent foreign intervention on behalf of the Islamist rebellion, his son was much more isolated in 2011 and had seen the Western response to the uprisings in Egypt, Libya and Tunisia already.

I strongly believed that Assad was following the advice of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, who suppressed the uprising in Iran in 2009-2010, and who had assumed that they could achieve the same success in Syria. Yet Syria is not Iran…

Was there a "golden hour / day /month" when external intervention could have ended the civil war? No.

I completely agree. As I have said to Outlaw and CrowBat many times, the reconstruction of Syria as a liberal democracy would have required a major and enduring U.S. or Western commitment.

[CrowBat]

Firstly, where did you arrive at this figure? Is it pre-Civil War? Even the lower bound would be more than four times higher than the non-political prison population. Assad was not “congratulated” for detaining some 200,000 people during the course of the war and murdering more than 10,000 of them.

Ah yes, excuse me: 60,000 disappeared and 200,000 others detained...

No wonder I concluded it's pointless do discuss this war with you, long ago.

[Azor]

Ah yes, excuse me: 60,000 disappeared and 200,000 others detained...

No wonder I concluded it's pointless do discuss this war with you, long ago.

I'm afraid that you sometimes play fast and loose with the timeline and the facts in Syria, conflating Bashar's and Hafez's policies, as well as the pre-war and wartime periods. All I asked was for clarification...