Four Safe No-Fly Zones Have Just Been Designated in Syria, Donald Trump Supports the Plan

Turkey, Iran, and Russia just signed a memorandum on the designation of four de-escalation zones or safe zones in an effort to reach an immediate cease fire and halt the violence. Russian envoy tells journalists in Astana that the airspce over these zones will be restricted, or No-Fly zones essentially to the Western coalition. Putin says Donald Trump supported the move in a phone call on May 2nd.

Turkey, Russia, Iran ink deal on safe zones in Syria
Turkey, Russia and Iran on May 4 signed a memorandum on a Moscow-backed plan to create safe zones in Syria to bolster a fragile truce.

An AFP reporter at peace talks in the Kazakh capital Astana saw the heads of the delegations, representing the three countries sponsoring the negotiations, sign the document.

However a member of the rebel delegation left the room, shouting against regime ally Iran, the AFP reporter saw. The Syrian government and rebel delegations are not signatories.
An Arabic-language version of the Russian draft proposal seen by AFP calls for the creation of “de-escalation zones” in rebel-held territory in the northwestern province of Idlib, in parts of Homs province in the center, in the south, and in the opposition enclave of Eastern Ghouta near Damascus.

The aim is to “put an immediate end to the violence” and “provide the conditions for the safe, voluntary return of refugees” as well as the immediate delivery of relief supplies and medical aid, the document said. But issues including which countries could police any safe zones remain unclear. Russian President Vladimir Putin said on May 3 that ways to monitor the zones would be an issue for separate talks.

The Kremlin’s plan echoes calls by U.S. leader Donald Trump to establish safe zones in Syria. Putin said May 3 that “as far I could tell” the U.S. leader broadly supported the idea in a phone call they held on May 2.

US-led coalition warplanes banned from Syria safe zones – Russian envoy



This will hopefully be a welcome reprieve for the citizens on Syria in these zones.

folks from both sides signing off on it..

Color me cautiously optimistic..

Here is to hoping.. the Syrian people have been through enough.

The doom porn and WW3 crowd will not like this because Trump would never be able to negotiate something like in the OP with foreign leaders. I like how Trump is proving them wrong time and time again. He gets sh!t done. This is definitely a good sign. NK will be caving in next. Mark my words.

Look where the zones are, onei blocks Israel jets from bombing Syrian targets. The other, US attack aircraft corridor from the Med to Iraq.

Slowly but surely those who support Al-Nusra/Islamic State/FSA, namely the United States, European Union and Saudi Arabia, are being boxed out of Syria. Likely they will have no say in the final peace negotiations once the Islamic State is gone.

Turkey's change of policy is quite refreshing.

a reply to: intrptr
Lets be realistic, Israel will not stop bombing Syria no matter what, but will probably continue just launching from their airspace. Donald wants out of Syria as long as daesh is rendered ineffective there. As far s blocking their aircraft though, we can always operate from the Persian Gulf, Incirlik in Turkey, Iraq itself directly, or Afghanistan.

originally posted by: worldstarcountry
a reply to: intrptr
Lets be realistic, Israel will not stop bombing Syria no matter what, but will probably continue just launching from their airspace. Donald wants out of Syria as long as daesh is rendered ineffective there. As far s blocking their aircraft though, we can always operate from the Persian Gulf, Incirlik in Turkey, Iraq itself directly, or Afghanistan.

Up until now, the missile launchers have sat idly by, tracking US air assets. Quite within range and easily employed, if they have the will.

They have in fact just declared the will to use them, beginning today 21:00, GMT.

We'll see... (maybe)

a reply to: intrptr
Are you talking about them stating the airspace is off limits, or was there actual language used that said essentially "we will shoot them down" ?
Although they can both be interpreted to mean the same, the latter is considered more of a direct threat and the former as a declaration of a guideline.

Did you read something recently which used language insinuating a shoot down was possible?? That to me would be very significant.

a reply to: worldstarcountry

10th time is a charm maybe this will stick?

a reply to: luthier
The FSA walked out of the talks. The legitimate armed Syrian opposition, and not the foreign terrorists have signed on and agreed. Surprisingly, they control the least amount of territory outside of the government. So this could finally open up some dialogue between the actual Syrian opposition minority, and finally drive out the majority foreign terrorists which are not exempted from confrontation still.

None of this affects the Syrian Defense Forces working for the US/NATO* in the Rojava territory.

*refers to NATO member states, and not NATO as operating under an official mandate

a reply to: worldstarcountry

So basically it just hinders drone and plane surveillance so the monsters can finish the job?

a reply to: worldstarcountry

Are you talking about them stating the airspace is off limits, or was there actual language used that said essentially "we will shoot them down" ?

Innocuous language bellies the actual intent. In the west we use the term 'no fly zones'...

The Russian Iranian and Turkish agreement uses different terms, Safe zones, De-escalation zones, whatever.
if its not backed by force, just more rhetoric. When the uS used it over Iraq and Libya, they meant shoot down zones.

Remains to be seen if the "Coalition" will ignore it and what consequences there are.

Tick, tock...

a reply to: worldstarcountry

Trump flip flopping again and this time is going the route Hillary always wanted to go, airstrikes and now No Fly Zones.

a reply to: Swills
No flip flop. I do believe he was for safe zones, the terms that were used after no fly zones were dismissed through congressional and senate debates. Except, it is not the USA that is lying down these four. America pretty much has its safe zone in Rojava, seeing as they effective pit themselves between the Turkish military and the Kurdish led Syrian Defense Forces to protect their assets their.

Hillary Clinton, Lindsey Graham, and John McCains version of safe zones would have had NATO* led coalition craft shooting down the Syrian government air assets in their own airspace to protect the nastiest elements of foreign terrorists there. Clearly that is very backwards.


a reply to: intrptr
It said in that article that the parties involved have worked out an arrangement, Israel included, to respect these restricted zones. I suppose Israel could be sincere in their efforts, however history tells us differently.

Rofl
American education system fails again

American aircraft banned from no fly zone in western Syria.

a reply to: worldstarcountry
Relative calm in Syrian safe zones after deal implemented

BEIRUT (AP) — Relative calm prevailed Saturday in wide parts of war-ravaged Syria despite sporadic violations and clashes after a deal to set up “de-escalation zones” in mostly opposition-held areas went into effect, opposition activists and government media outlets said.

There were no immediate reports of casualties after the plan hammered out by Russia, Turkey and Iran — the latest attempt to bring calm to the country — kicked in at midnight Friday.

“Despite some violations the situation is much calmer than before,” said opposition activist Mohammed al-Homsi, speaking via Skype from northern Syria.

Russia and Iran — two of the plan’s three sponsors — are key allies of President Bashar Assad’s government and both are viewed as foreign occupation forces by his opponents. Rebels fighting to topple Assad are enraged by Iran’s role in the deal and blame the Shiite power for fueling the sectarian nature of Syria’s conflict, now in its seventh year.

Turkey, the third sponsor, is a major backer of opposition factions and has also sent troops into northern Syria, drawing the ire of Assad and his government.

Yet troops from the three countries are now expected to secure four safe zones. An official with Russia’s military general staff said other countries may eventually have a role in enforcing the de-escalation areas.

Russian Col.-Gen. Sergei Rudskoi told reporters on Friday that personnel from Russia, Iran and Turkey will operate checkpoints and observation posts.

But it’s difficult to imagine how many boots on the ground would be needed to monitor the yet to be mapped areas or how and where exactly Russian, Iranian and Turkish troops would patrol.

originally posted by: intrptr


Look where the zones are, onei blocks Israel jets from bombing Syrian targets. The other, US attack aircraft corridor from the Med to Iraq.

Stop deluding yourself. Take a look at a map. Coalition air routes from the Mediterranean do not overfly Syria. The routes to Iraq have always been over Turkey or Israel, Jordan and into Iraq. There isn't really a "US attack aircraft corridor" from the Med. That would only be the case if a US carrier was stationed in the Eastern Med. The routes would still be the same and take the Turkey or the Israeli, Jordan route. There is no such requirement for US forces as they are either flying off carriers in the Persian Gulf or from land bases nearer to Iraq.

The routes from the Eastern Med are through Israel, into Jordan and then into Iraq. The other route is through Turkey and down into Iraq. Tanker and fighter, fighter-bombers take these routes from Cyprus. Essentially the only country flying from the Eastern Mediterranean for Iraqi ops is the UK out of Cyprus (RAF Akrotiri).

See tracking on flight tracking software showing the Turkey and Israel/Jordan routes.

twitter.com...

twitter.com...

Voyager air-to-air tankers in support operating out of Cyprus.

twitter.com...

twitter.com...

twitter.com...

theaviationist.com...

a reply to: tommyjo

Coalition air routes from the Mediterranean do not overfly Syria.

The whole reason Russia declared no fly zones was because NATO flies into Syrian airspace all day long.

Every single time they cross the Syrian border they break International Law regarding Sovereignty of Nations.

Not that warmongers care at all about that.

originally posted by: worldstarcountry
a reply to: intrptr
Are you talking about them stating the airspace is off limits, or was there actual language used that said essentially "we will shoot them down" ?
Although they can both be interpreted to mean the same, the latter is considered more of a direct threat and the former as a declaration of a guideline.

Did you read something recently which used language insinuating a shoot down was possible?? That to me would be very significant.

To clarify, when the west uses the term 'no fly' they really mean 'only we fly'...

When Russia uses the term they mean 'everybody'. The only way peace can be given a chance is to stop the bombing...

period