Will Trump Surrender to the Deep State?
By Kennedy Applebaum
Quemado Institute
July 17, 2017
US President Donald Trump mingles with world leaders at G20 Summit in Hamburg, July 8, 2017 (–New Indian Express/PTI)
I have my theories on President Donald J. Trump and how he operates in the real world. His actions invariably defy analysis. There is a good reason for this. He is up against huge opposition. The globalist elite and their media that dictate U.S. deep state anti-Russian policies want to see Trump impeached—removed from office for seeking world peace through cooperation with Russia. This Russophobic elite comprises not the just the American aristocracy, but also the banking and financial clan of Europe, which has more to lose than anyone from a US-Russian alliance.
Never more than now has the potential of this alliance been apparent. The successful talk between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin at the G20 in Hamburg on July 7—which emerged as the main event while the G20 itself was a side meeting—has become a showcase for the limitless possibilities of these two leaders to create peace in the world. The US-Russian-Jordanian ceasefire in Syria arranged at this meeting continues to hold as of Sunday, July 16, despite opposition from the deep state and Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu.
Not only is he stalked by radical opposition, Trump is also highly intelligent, reputed to boast a genius IQ. This combination means he can, and must, throw his opponents off guard. And keep them off guard.
Will Trump surrender to the Deep State, as Federico Pieraccini, in his thought-provoking article that has spread across the internet, begs us to ask? My answer is, the American President will appear to surrender, then he will appear not to surrender, then he will appear to surrender … ad nauseum, until political analysts are so confused they drop the subject and declare him insane.
Meanwhile, Trump will work behind the scenes to set a straight course toward international sanity, a sanity entailing peace and sovereignty for all nations.
What does this mean for Syria?
First of all, I believe, and it must be understood, that Trump carried out the Tomahawk strike on Shayrat Airbase not—I repeat not—because Syrian President Bashar al–Assad had used chemical weapons—an allegation so absurd it’s impossible to believe the CIA could have fooled Trump—but as an indelible message to Assad to leave Israel alone. After all, only a few days earlier, Syrian government forces had shot down an Israeli war plane from that very same Shayrat Airbase. Was Trump going to sit back and let Assad attack the Israeli military, especially since it might spark escalation between the two hostile nations? Of course not, considering Trump’s commitment to Israel. And to peace.
Was there a another way Trump might have sent the message? Could the US President have framed it, for example, in diplomatic formalities? That seems hardly effective. Not only does the US have no diplomatic relations with Syria, but diplomacy in any case would have fallen flat.
Could Trump have been honest about his reason for striking Shayrat, declaring outright he was defending the Israeli military? This would have been not just a declaration of war on Syria, but a declaration that the US was entering the war on Israel’s side, a catastrophic aggression inviting World War III.
Trump had to send his message not just unambiguously, but also in encrypted form. It takes a genius to do this. Thus, Trump took opportunistic advantage, as a businessman would, of Assad’s alleged chemical weapons attack as the least dangerous pretext.
How clear was Trump’s message? Shayrat means Shayrat–that’s pretty clear. In fact, the message was clear enough to let the Syrian President know that “chemical weapons allegations” are Trump’s encrypted code for “Don’t attack Israel.” Like two lone travelers with no common language meeting in the darkest jungle. Tree means tree.
Has Trump used this code again? Indeed, his more recent threats to Assad in June about the latter’s alleged imminent chemical weapons attack was a message to the Syrian leader not to retaliate against Israel for its strikes carried out from the Golan Heights. And Assad got the message.
Trump’s goal is to prevent an escalation of hostilities between Israel and Syria, in which Israel is, of course, the aggressor. As Pieraccini notes, “[D]angerous confrontations between … Syria and Israel … could escalate out of control, as seen when … Israel, from its position in the occupied Golan Heights, has repeatedly struck the Syrian Arab Army in a desperate effort to halt its gains against al Qaeda and Daesh terrorists.”
The de-escalation zone, set up by Trump and Putin, comprises an area of southwest Syria bordering the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights. This American-Russian-Jordan sponsored zone, policed by Russia but not agreed upon by Israel’s Netanyahu, is designed, I believe, to stop further Israeli attacks on Syria. That the Russians will police the zone means it is not a land grab by the United States, and may lay the groundwork for US withdrawal.
Defying all pundits, the Tomahawk strike at Shayrat was an encrypted step toward peace.
I hold out faith that Trump will prevail.
Quemado Institute 
Discussion
No comments yet.