The European Union Boycotts Russia’s Syria Initiatives

Donate

The European Union Boycotts Russia’s Syria Initiatives

FILE IMAGE

Written by Evgeny Satanovsky; Originally appeared at VPK, translated by AlexD exclusively for SouthFront

The hopes of the Russian diplomats for the US, the EU countries and the UN humanitarian agencies’ participation in the reconstruction of Syria and the return of refugees to its territory were dashed. At the same time, China intends to intensify its participation in the conflict, and Damascus, with the support of the Russian Aerospace Forces, is working on the return of the last stronghold of Islamists, province of Idlib, under its control.

In the Syrian crisis, China is trying on the role of mediator between the opposition and Damascus. Taking into account the location of the bulk of the pro-Saudi opposition (banned in Russia Jabhat al-Nusra) in Idlib, as well as the mobilisation of Moscow, Tehran and Damascus in this province after the elimination of the de-escalation zone in the south, it can be concluded that Beijing is trying to determine the feasibility of active participation in the Syrian dossier in relation to Idlib with access to more active interaction with Damascus in the medium term, including the participation in the large-scale infrastructure projects to restore the economy of Syria.

On August 3, the Chinese Ambassador to Syria and the Chinese military attaché discussed with representatives of the Syrian Arab Republic (SAR) the possibility of involving their security forces in the government formations’ actions in Idlib. With the exception of UN peacekeeping operations, Beijing avoids taking part in hostilities beyond its own borders or its immediate region. The operation in Syria could be the first step for a more active presence in the areas of China’s national interests, except for the Chinese military base in Djibouti.

For China, first and foremost the important matter are the militants from the Islamic party of Turkestan, operating in Idlib. Beijing is interested in destroying the Uighur separatists before they return to central Asia or China. Therefore, if China decides to support the liberation of Idlib campaign, it will be of a local nature and relate to the neutralisation of leaders and militants-Uighurs. In this case, participation will be expressed in the direction of military advisers, intelligence structures and Special Forces. During the consultations, the military attaché raised the issue of the involvement of the Chinese police unit “Snow Leopard” in such operations.

From the point of view of possible foreign policy risks for its participation in the operation in Idlib, Beijing should take into account the possible complication of relations with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) and Turkey. Ankara sees the Uighurs as a loyal force and a tool to strengthen its influence in Idlib in opposition to pro-Saudi groups. So China will have to carefully approach any military intervention in Syria. Beijing needs to coordinate with Russia, the Syrian government and Turkey to avoid serious complications. The relevant statements from officials in Beijing, as well as the results of negotiations between Russia, Iran, Syria, Turkey and China on the status of Idlib may become indicators of the possible participation of the Chinese military in the Idlib operations.

Idlib – Barganing Chip

Currently, Idlib is a zone of residence of the irreconcilable opponents of President Assad, which is freely functioning with the permission of Moscow, Damascus, Tehran and Ankara. The existence of this stronghold of Jabhat al-Nusra is incompatible with Moscow and Damascus’s plans for the post-war structure of Syria. The question now is not even how this zone will exist, but how to eliminate the pro-Saudi component of the resistance. The solution to the problem of Idlib is the departure from the scene of one of the main external sponsors of the resistance, namely the KSA. For Saudi Arabia, the elimination of the pro-Saudi armed wing of the opposition in Syria means a sharp decline of its influence in this part of the Middle East, which changes the balance of power in the entire region.

To understand the situation with Idlib more clearly, it is necessary to recall the positions of the parties (Russia, Iran and Turkey). There is a consensus that Idlib is a zone where Ankara is the guarantor of peace. But the Turks do not agree with the position of Moscow and Damascus to eliminate Jabhat al-Nusra. Ankara stands for their “peaceful” absorption, following the example of the southern de-escalation zones, and Russia stands for a combination of carrot and stick, believing that until the militants see the prospect of their destruction, they will not compromise. The Turks want to keep this area under their control as an argument in the dialogue with Damascus and create a Sunni force there that will oppose Damascus, claiming a leading role in the executive. At the same time, they put pressure on the Kurds of northern Syria, fortunately, expectations for the implementation of Turkey’s agreements on the Kurdish issue with the United States, proved unrealistic.

In Astana, in July, Turkey was given time before the next meeting in the autumn to demonstrate that their proposals for the peaceful absorption of the pro-Saudi segment of the resistance are being implemented successfully. So far it does not work. Terrorists from Jabhat al-Nursa carried out in the province of Idlib arrests of warlords from groups that agree to reconciliation with the Syrian Army. The newspaper “Al Akhbar” reported this on August 10. At least 50 militant commanders who have come into contact with the Syrian command are under arrest. Jabhat al-Nusra has imposed a curfew in 17 locations in southeast Idlib, fearing that their inhabitants will revolt against gangs and call for help to the government troops, as happened earlier in East Ghouta and in the southern province of Deraa.

Terrorists control about 60 percent of the province, which is located on the border with Turkey. The rest of it is in the hands of the opposition from the Syrian Free Army and Islamic radical groups, the largest of which are Ahrar al-Sham and the Nureddin al-Zingi Brigades, which cooperate with Ankara. On August 1, it was announced in Idlib the creation of the National Liberation Front (NLF) coalition, which includes 14 opposition groups. Its numbers are estimated at 40 to 50 thousand fighters. The figure is clearly overstated; with such forces the issue of the Saudi presence in Idlib would have been resolved. The head of the NLF is the former field commander of the Faylak ash-Sham Brigade, Fadlallah al-Hajji. According to Al Akhbar, Ankara intends to use these powers to displace Jabhat al-Nusra from Idlib. Pro-Turkish groups tried to take control of Idlib a couple of years ago. It ended then in a split of Ahrar al Sham and the absorption of part of its military wing Jabhat al-Nusra

Damascus reserves the right to intervene in the situation. On August 10, the Syrian Air Force and artillery attacked Jabhat al-Nusra bases near the administrative border between the provinces of Hama and Idlib. As reported by the agency SANA, the attack on the militant positions was in response to the violation of the ceasefire in the northern de-escalation zone. Command centres of the militants and weapons depots in areas of Tal Wasat, Zeyarah and Mansura were destroyed, and there were killed and injured in the ranks of Jabhat al-Nusra. Strikes were carried out also on the bases of the group Kataib al-Issa in the settlements of Kafr Nabudah, Tal al-Sakhr and Ma’rkabah, 48 kilometres northwest from the provincial capital, Hama. According to the agency SANA, foreign mercenaries are fighting in the ranks of this group, infiltrated from the Turkish border into the valley of Suk al Ghab near the river Orontes, from where they attack the villages and army checkpoints.

As reported by the news portal Surya al-En, Syrian pilots dropped leaflets from planes over the city of Taftanaz in Idlib province. In them, the command of the Armed Forces of the Republic called on local field commanders to follow the example of the armed opposition in East Ghouta and southern Syria, who agreed to reconciliation with the authorities. The Syrian army is preparing an operation to liberate the city of Jisr al-Shugur, captured by terrorists in April 2015. It stands on a mountain pass through which passes the strategic highway Latakia-Aleppo. In case of success of the operation, troops will be able to cut off the southern region of Idlib and block large outposts of armed groups in Khan Shaykhun, Ma’arat al-Nu’man and Kafr Zita. As far as can be seen, regardless of Ankara’s actions, it is planned to complete the dissection of the Idlib enclave into two parts, which the government forces tried to do on the eve of the aggravation of the situation in the south in the spring of 2018. Apparently, the operation will start in the autumn and will be synchronised with the military activity of pro-Turkish groups in Idlib.

The Army is Waiting for Orders

The command of the Syrian Armed Forces is sending reinforcements to the provincial centre of Aleppo (360 Km from Damascus) in the north of the country, where an operation against terrorists from Jabhat al-Nusra is being prepared. According to the newspaper al-Watan, the troops will conduct an attack on the towns of Kafr Hamra, Khoreitan, Anadan, al Bayanun and Khayan, to clear them from the gangs shelling the western neighbourhoods of Aleppo. The task of the government forces is to regain control of the southwestern suburbs of Aleppo, where Ahrar al-Sham and Nureddin al-Zingi operate. They are holding settlements near the highway going to the checkpoint Bab al Hawa on the Syrian-Turkish border. Their main outpost is located in Mansura, Khan al-Asal and al Atarib. According to al-Watan, the operation is also aimed at securing the eastern outskirts of Greater Aleppo, which will allow the reopening of the international airport in Nayreb.

The army offensive will begin on the front line near the administrative border of the provinces of Aleppo and Idlib, where the military airfield Abu Duhur serves as a base for government forces. The troops will simultaneously attack the bases of the armed groups in the northeastern provinces of Latakia and Hama in order to eliminate the threat of their invasion of the coastal areas and the valley of Suk Al Ghab near the river Orontes. The Syrian Air Force is dropping leaflets over the cities of Jisr ash-Shughur, Taftanaz and Saraqib (Idlib province), seized by armed groups, urging militants to lay down their arms and surrender, following the example of the armed opposition in East Ghouta. These three cities are part of the de-escalation zones established in 2017 in Idlib province and surrounding areas.

Preparations are under way to launch military operations by government forces against not only pro-Saudi groups, but also, in some cases, pro-Turkish groups, which is particularly evident in the planned military operations in Aleppo. The beginning of the offensive is constrained only by Moscow’s position, which took a pause to determine the conditions for a compromise with Ankara on the actions in Idlib. The main question is, how much time Moscow averted to Ankara in order to separate radicals and moderates oppositions and to shift off its responsibility for the fate of the irreconcilable opposition?

The UN has Betrayed Syria

The US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo discussed with Special Envoy of the UN Secretary General for Syria Staffan de Mistura prospects for the return of refugees to Syria, as well as the need to “prevent the emergence of a humanitarian crisis in the city of Idlib”. This is stated by the press service of the State Department. Pompeo made it clear that although the United States supports the return of refugees to Syria, this should only happen when the situation in Syria is sufficiently safe, as well as with the participation of relevant UN entities. Pompeo and de Mistura agreed that “discussions on reconstruction are premature in the absence of a political solution, which in any case should lead to constitutional reform and open and fair elections”.

The State Department indicated that they discussed the progress in the formation of the so-called Constitutional Committee of Syria, the agreement on which was reached on the results of the congress of the Syrian National Dialogue held in Sochi on January 30. This structure, together with de Mistura, will have to prepare proposals for the elaboration of the county’s constitution. Earlier, the head of the press service of the State Department, Heather Nauert, recalled that the United States still considers the Geneva process the only viable way to find a political solution to the crisis in Syria, calling the other negotiations secondary. She spoke about the Astana format in such a fashion. Nauert said that in the near future, Washington will announce a doubling of efforts to support the Geneva process.

Thus the leadership of the US State Department together with relevant senior officials of the UN refused to participate in the campaign of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation on the organisation of the “massive return of refugees” to Syria. Having laid out this proposition through the Russian-American summit as a “new unifying idea for all foreign sponsors of the Syrian dossier”, the Russian Foreign Ministry believed that President Trump’s “Yes” in response to such an initiative is the solution. The US Secretary of State made it clear that there is no question of any return of Syrian refugees under Moscow’s auspices, as well as any initiative that can give Russia the illusion that it began to interact as a partner. The West will talk in this way only when it cannot do without the participation of the Russian side. At present, these are issues related to the competence of the coercive unit. That is why the National Security Advisor of the United States J. Bolton meets with Russian colleagues on a regular basis.

The strategy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation is clear: any way to break through the foreign blockade of Russia and to stimulate the collective West at the beginning of the joint work in the full format. In this regard, the topic of Syrian refugees and their return to their homeland was born. Europeans had to bite, for them it is important. And for the Lebanese and Jordanians, the question is urgent: “their” Syrian refugees are about six million people. And, theoretically, a joint plan for the restoration and improvement of Syria had to be put on the agenda. There are no other motives for the intensification of diplomatic and other efforts for the massive return of Syrian refugees. Neither infrastructure nor mass restructuring of the social consciousness is ready in the country. Who counted how many radicals and irreconcilable opponents of Bashar al-Assad’s regime are among the refugees? In the framework of the campaign we recreated the rear base anti-Assad resistance inside Syria.

The main reason for the failure of the initiative is that the West did not go for it. There, despite all disagreements, they are united in politically ignoring Russia. No initiatives from Moscow, even on the most topical issues for Europeans, will be accepted. The actions with the participation of Russia and France, when humanitarian aid was delivered to East Ghouta, gave rise to excessive illusions in the Russian Foreign Ministry, from which came the initiatives for the return of Syrian refugees. As for the UNHRC, this agency outright fulfills the US order for the evacuation of member of the White Helmets from Syria, and to believe that it will decide to cooperate with Moscow is naïve. This is a joint position of the UN, which became clear after Pompeo’s meeting with de Mistura. The West is not going to restore the destroyed infrastructure of Syria under any circumstances. The appeals of the Foreign Ministry of the Russian Federation are ignored. This means a collective EU boycott of the Russian initiative. The same is true of Jordan.

The Lebanese leadership, given the influence that Iran has in that country, would most likely attempt to expel Syrian refugees from its territory. Beirut has enough problems with the Palestinians to look calmly at the presence of Syrians in Lebanon. However, according to external observers, the number of people willing to voluntarily return to their homeland does not exceed three thousand, despite the fact that this number will instantly fall to zero in the event of an intensification of the confrontation in Syria or violent actions against the returnees. The big question is, who in Lebanon will be ready and able to participate in the deportation of refugees to Syria, if such a decision is taken? Without victims, by definition, it cannot be implemented, which means the humanitarian risks that Moscow and official Damascus will be guilty of.

As for Turkey, the return of Syrian refugees into the territory controlled by Assad is not visible in the future. Many of them were assimilated in the country (Ankara is making significant efforts in this), and Erdogan needs them as a tool of pressure on the EU, allowing him to receive billions of euros from Brussels, keeping the European Union, primarily neighbouring Greece with its complex relations with Turkey and Germany as the goal of most illegal immigrant, under constant pressure. In addition, he considers Syrian refugees as potential residents of the Turkish-controlled north of Syria as opposed to the Kurds. So their return is out of the question.

The article is based on material from the Middle East Instite expert Yu. Schelgovin.

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • Jim Prendergast

    The U.N. is compromised. It depends upon the will of the people of it’s member states. The will of the people of the member states has been hijacked by special interest groups. We the people want to be united on an international basis. Perhaps we need a new non institutional means to unite.

    • jorge

      Good night Jim, the article above is biased, for example, this contradicts good part of one of the article sections: https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/some-10000-nusra-al-qaeda-terrorists-in-idlib-have-to-be-defeated-de-mistura/

    • purplelibraryguy

      Actually, it’s amazing the resolutions that pass by large margins in the UN General Assembly. What keeps the lid on the masses (and has since the beginning) is the Security Council, and more specifically the veto held by each permanent member.

    • Spit

      There is no UN. Its the paper mafia. 95 iq. Can be defeated. You say thevwill of the people? The masses are ready. But the heavy foot of the government is stronger. All THE masses need now is a guaranteed source of food and to understand. That the king is a nobody without YOU. YOU can LITARALLY tell merkel and her british childhood friend whats her name? The brit childless old hagg who stopped brexit. Whatever who cares. YOU can lita… Therwssa may! YOU CAN LITARALLY JUST SAY NO

  • Tommy Jensen
  • AJ

    Well if the UN doesnt help with post war reconstruction the only ones with any money are China. Russia can only do so much and Iran is under sanctions so it has little to offer.

    • Mikronos

      Amneica’s got money. Maybe only for military expansion but it has lots of money and it is making a choice.

      Having sh*at upon the land the big dog sniffs his droppings and moseys along to the telephone pole.

      • Gary Sellars

        Murica has lots of printed fiat currency… but that’s not going to be useful once the USD primacy is lost and the US can no longer print money and export their inflation.

      • John Whitehot

        actually, America’s got debt.

        and budget deficit spending.

        never seen anybody spending more than he got having any kind of money.

        • Tommy Jensen

          The real problem is that the money America is spending is your money and my money, and we are not even aware of this reality………………………….LOL.

          • John Whitehot

            idk about you, but i’m not a us citizen.

            in any case, even if what you are saying makes sense under a financial or banking perspective, it doesn’t seem that it’s doing any good to the us economy.

            so far they could rob their way into accumulating more debt because of how the value of money has lost any real absolute value.

            this is going to change as the nations who have the real richness have come together and rejected “fiat currency” as value.

          • purplelibraryguy

            You’re not a US citizen, and yet the money they’re spending is STILL your money. The US dollar as world reserve/trade currency causes your government and businesses involved in trade to buy dollars, allowing the US dollar to remain high even when the US prints money like there was no tomorrow. Then the US uses all that money your government spent to buy those dollars, to buy goods and your companies and such. The actual American people outside the .001% or so don’t see much of it, any more than they see any of the loot from US invasions, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

          • John Whitehot

            in line of principle, it could be.

            but if what you say is true, then tell me, how much money does the US government clique actually owes me?

          • purplelibraryguy

            Dunno. Probably quite a bit, though not as much as they owe the average African I expect.
            Heh. Exact opposite of the Battle of Britain: Never in history has so much been owed to so many by so few!

          • John Whitehot

            “Dunno. Probably quite a bit”

            This is not right.
            Call a jewish appraiser. Call the cops or something, I wanna know how much the cliques owes me !.

  • Barba_Papa

    In Europe they still talk about taking in more Syrian ‘refugees’ from Turkey. Even though the war is winding down and most of the country is returning to normal.

  • Xanatos

    Just bring the war to Saudi Arabia already. They’ll never stop financing the terrorist army in idlib until they realize they have something to lose.

    Nuke their crude terminal facilities. No one will buy radioactive oil.

    • Mikronos

      The war won’t need to be ‘brought’ there. The place is the original petri dush for the Caliphate culture and jihad. The Sauds aren’t qualified to lead that, nor could they.

    • Silviu Costea

      Not really. The root of evil is Srael. Nuke Srael to have world peace.

      • purplelibraryguy

        People talking easily about nuking things need to give their head a shake. That kind of stuff has a very significant chance of escalating and simply killing us all, every single living human being. On the plus side, it would put the brakes on global warming. But we’d be a little too dead to appreciate it.

    • Sinbad2

      “No one will buy radioactive oil.”

      Wanna bet?

    • Arthur Smith

      EU bought some pipes made from metal salvaged in Chernobyl, never say never

  • Ma_Laoshi

    A good deal of spin here. I’ve seen little evidence that Syria has less to fear from pro-Turkish head-choppers than from pro-Saudi ones; the distinction is one of the ways in which the Syria mission is used to sometimes further Moscow’s interest over Syria’s one. In the same vein, one also notes that the Idlib operation is nonstop advertised as the “final” one in this war; seems TPTB have decided that Afrin and N Aleppo should go to Erdogan as a thank-you for all the years he supported ISIS, and profited from its oil trade.

    Should China decide to fight Idlib terrorists for real (Aug is nearly over and we haven’t really seen the brothers; wouldn’t hold my breath), it’d mean they’ve finally stood up against the Dark Throne. Damn straight there’ll be “complications”; the question is rather if China is prepared to shoulder its part of the complications with Russia and Iran. Or maybe they’ve now understood that said Throne will most definitely use Uighur militants for some juicy complications in China itself, i.e., complications cannot be avoided and it’s best to retain some initiative in tackling them.

    This whining about the EU’s attitude is just Russia being Russia. The EU is the civilian arm of NATO; of course they’ll oppose you at every turn. You want to make progress, step one is to get taken seriously, so stop pretending you’re all friends when you obviously are not. Why would you even want to involve them: EU/NATO engaged in an aggressive war, and lost; let them watch from the sidelines as all the reconstruction contracts go to the victors. Let them stew in their refugees a bit; then when they cry uncle, you send them hat in hand to Damascus. That’s how these malcontents will learn something; or does Russia want to do it all over again in the Caucasus?

    • Carol Davidek-Waller

      Nonsense. Russia and Syria have been allies for an very long time. It’s one of the reasons the US./Saudi coalition unleashed its terrorist army. In the frightening PNAC doctrine, released before 9-11, outlines US plans to dominate the globe militarily beginmining with gaining control of ME oil.
      This paper is a monument to hubris, assuming no other nation will object or oppose. They were sadly mistaken.

  • Turbofan

    The Syrians in Europe will not be allowed to return to Syria. Someone has to care for the aging population of Europe

    • Sinbad2

      Oh they will care for them alright, with a dagger to the heart.
      Most of these refugees have had loved ones murdered by the people they now live with in Europe, many will take revenge, and you can’t really blame them.

      • purplelibraryguy

        One might think, but refugee populations never seem to actually do that.

  • Jon

    This massive sword rattling is useless. Russia does not want a fight with US nor does US want a fight with Russia.

    The Turks are in it for the Turks and the Russian Iranian Turkish cooperation stops at the border of Turkish occupied Syria. Why push it? Leave it be. Declare the peace and rebuild those portion size of Syria presently controlled by Assad. Let the Turks tame the contending rebel forces in their areas of influence.

    On September 7, Putin wants to show Iran he is a trustworthy partner but for Russia’s sake that partnership must stop well short of the blank check sought by Iran. It is enough for Putin to have arranged a peace, even a temporary one, reflecting the status quo on the ground.

    Half of Israel speaks Russian. Russia has no interest served by underwriting the Iranian obsession with annihilating Israel. Russia has much to be gained by letting Israel protect itself.

    The firepower being assembled in this orchestrated dance of death is a witches brew and a very unstable mixture. For the sake of all people everywhere, Mr. Putin, secure your Nobel by declaring the peace and working toward mending the wounds but leaving the existing status of forces unchanged.

    • jorge

      The existing status of forces is Syria and Russia winning, and you don’t like it, but this is a bad place to express your dreams. As you like castilian, I’m not going to repeat that no one will annex a single inch of Syrian land, I’ll only say, los invasores extranjeros no pasarán!

      • Jon

        ¿Quienes son los invasores extranjeros? De veras, los rusos y los iranies, pero no son los turquies. Pútin debe hacer la paz.

        • jorge

          You are upside down to reality, it’s an old problem of those who try to deny it (the reality). As you try to deny the reality, a suggestion for reading that I think you are gonna like: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Dialogues_between_Hylas_and_Philonous

        • purplelibraryguy

          The difference between an invader and someone who is not an invader is whether the government of the place invaded wants someone there. Russia and Iran were invited by the Syrian government. The others were not. QED.

          The various different groups and sects and whatnot of rebels do not command the same legitimacy in terms of invitation simply because most of them were, themselves, invaders and all of them were paid and armed by foreign powers, making them mercenaries in the pay of foreign powers rather than domestic actors. Foreign mercenaries inviting their paymasters into a country does not count for making someone not an invader.

    • Mikronos

      What Nobel? Putin never got one nor, while he’s a ‘world pariah’ – invading and annexing, will he get one. Prince Abdullah is 4 or 5 places closer to ‘the gong’.

      America, happy in the middle east, is no good news for Putin. He’s going to do what he has to do to looks after Russia and support Russia’s friends. What we’ve seen is what we’re getting.

      • Jon

        I am saying that Putin controls whether or not the bloodbath over Idlib happens. If he withholds Russian air support and ground support for the SAA invasion of Idlib Assad won’t go. The status quo will prevail.

        If he leaves Israel and Iran to resolve their grievances themselves the status quo will prevail.

        He makes peace by withholding his hand at this critical juncture. If he lends his might to Assad or Iran he brings destruction, and chaos, not peace and order.

        • Gary Sellars

          If he lends his might to Assad or Iran he brings destruction, and chaos TO THE TERROR GANGS, and that WILL bring peace and order.

          No compromise. Kill the terrorists.

        • Rob SR.

          No he brings destruction only too the terrorists and Russia opponents who work against Russia’s interests. Russia does have to carefully maneuver politically when dealing with the west, Israel, turkey, Syria, Iran and Gulf states

          • Ace

            Putin and Lavrov have a difficult task in that they must deal with psychopaths and fools in the U.S. government.

        • Ronald

          Putin has Russian forces backing the UN along the Golan Heights, ensuring the safety of Israel from ground attack from Syria, Hezbollah or Iran. Your assertion that Iranian and Lebanese backing of Syria in Idlib is somehow a threat to Israel has no grounding in reality. Idlib is far from the Israeli border, there is no threat to it.
          Syria has the right to its security as does any sovereign nation.
          Assad would be negligent in his duty if he allowed the two and a half million Syrians native to Idlib to continue to be oppressed by Wahhabi jihadists.

        • purplelibraryguy

          If I were Assad, I’d attack Idlib even if the Russians abandoned me. I’d have too many reasons that I need to take it and too few not to. “The Turks would be annoyed because they want to keep my turf” is just a really lousy reason not to take back my own land. What are they going to do, start a real live undeniable NATO invasion over me killing some of their tame terrorists?
          And I really don’t see why you think Iran/Israel has much to do with it.

      • Sinbad2

        Nobel was a founding member of the MIC.

        • Rex drabble

          He made huge money as an arms dealer and his guilt drove him to create the prize but NOT before millions had died and he was very wealthy

          • Sinbad2

            His company Bofors, still sells guns.

            I think the peace prize is just an early form of double speak.

            Most of the winners have actually been warmongers. The 2016 winner Juan Manuel Santos is a well known fascist and CIA asset who oppressed the people of Columbia to enrich the USA. Other winners include Obama, Carter, Yasser Arafat and Henry Kissinger. Sometimes they award the prize to a genuine peacenik, but warmongers get it most of the time.

            Other examples of doublespeak include the war on drugs, where the USA has flooded the world with cocaine and heroin, and should be called the war of drugs.
            The war on terror, is the war of terror, and the USA has created vast armies of terrorists to further the interests of the USA.

      • Ace

        Yes, invading and annexing. If anything defines Russia that is IT.

        Crimea would be part of Ukraine this very minute had the U.S. not engineered the overthrow of the elected government of Ukraine.

        Russian troops are in S. Ossetia because Georgia unwisely chose to invade S. Ossetia.

        Percentage increase in territory of Russian Federation (due to provocation) = 0.17%.

        Oooh. Russia’s on the march to world domination. Putin = Hitler. 500,000+ Syrian deaths due to U.S. aggressive, unconstitutional war on Syria = no problem!

        • Arthur Smith

          Russian peacekeepers first arrived in S.Ossetia with georgian consent, there is no need to justify their presence beyond that, especially by less solid arguments.

    • Sinbad2

      Wrong, the US does want a fight with Russia, the USA has been attacking Russia since 1919.
      The USA is a psycho killer, it wants to turn the rest of the world into slaves.

      This will go down to nukes, because war is the way the USA solves all its problems.

      • Ace

        Please. Get a grip. There will be no nukes. You’re right about the U.S. mania for war though.

    • Gary Sellars

      No, there is no “leave it be”. These terrorist scum have conspired with foreign nations and taken up arms against their own nation and its people, all to impose a strict Wahabbi Sahia law state (and exterminate the religious minorities).

      There is NO compromise. Would the US compromise if they had a enclave run by foreign-supported terror gangs? Would the EU? No, they wouldn’t, so I see no reason why the Syrian government should.

      Kill the terrorists, all of them. No mercy.

    • purplelibraryguy

      This makes little sense. First point: I’ve seen little evidence that Iran was obsessed with annihilating Israel. But the evidence points overwhelmingly to the reverse: Israel, or at least Netanyahu and many similar thinkers, are obsessed with annihilating Iran.
      Second point: If the end of this story gives certain actors (US, Saudis etc) a lot that they did not have at the beginning, they will conclude that it worked pretty well and just do it again, so any “peace” you could get by leaving a sort of patchwork non-Syria in place would be very temporary.
      Third point: Iran is hardly the issue. The main ally Russia is helping here is Syria, an ally that Russia does not want to see eliminated or weakened.
      Fourth point: Thinking of Syria, the Syrians, who you left completely out of your post, have no motivation to stop now. There are four pockets of Syria remaining outside the hands of the Syrian government. Those are, the section held by the Kurds with US sponsorship and US boots on the ground, the section of desert in the south held directly by the US, the section around Afrin held directly by the Turks, and Idlib, held by terrorists (albeit with influence, supplies, money, training from outsiders).
      When it comes time to negotiate, a scenario where the only parts of Syria not held by the Syrian government are the parts held pretty much directly by foreign powers is quite different from one in which the Syrian government has still been unable to secure all its territory from nominally internal rebels. If the Syrian government controls all those parts of Syria not being kept from it by the United States or Turkey, they have far fewer legs to stand on trying to refuse to give it back.

  • John

    I am wondering if the Russia move to get the aid ball rolling was a clearing the air, recon by fire effort. Russia doesn’t put anything on the table, without having thought it through a significant amount of steps ahead. I offer the way they recently handled Ukraine’s harassment of their fishing vessels; absolute brilliance in planning and execution. In the vernacular, the reconstruction proposal was not so much a trap but, a public nailing of feet to the ground for the US, UN and EU. They swallowed it hole hog, even offering to hold the nails while they were pounded to depth.

    I think the real plan for reconstruction in Syria was formed a while ago. The signing of a defense and economic cooperation agreement between Syria and Iran this week attests to that. Long ago, even straight from president Assad, the Syrian government has made it clear that it will not involve in the reconstruction of the country, those that attacked it in the first place or have been complicit in that attack. The US, UN, Eu and Co. were all thus involved. The diplomatic move by Russia was more of a question than a proposal in my mind ( do you want to continue to war against the duly elected Syrian government? ). The answer was yes. So be it. My take and I wish well to all.

    • Feudalism Victory

      Makes sense to me.

  • Gary Sellars

    Kill the terrorists, all of them. No mercy.

    Fuck the US and their quisling satraps in the UN. They are not part of the solution – they are the problem. I’d kill them too except it would trigger a larger conflict.

  • Talk to the Moderate Opposition, Mesers Russia & China – and when you’re dne talking – bomb them.

  • John Whitehot

    when did Russian diplomats hope that the EU would participate in reconstruction of Syria, since France and UK are among the most responsible state actors of the attempt to destroy the country?

    I don’t think there’s ever been space for them in the postwar Syria, Russia and China, the CSTO are Syria’s allies.

    The more I read these articles the more they seem to come from those which were looking to take power over Eurasia and have been put in their places.

    • purplelibraryguy

      I’d say it’s pretty obvious that the Russians never expected anything from the EU. The point of even offering is just to dot all the diplomatic “i”s, cross all the “t”s, and be able to say “Well, we offered like good global citizens to bring them in, so if they’re not in it’s their fault.” Putin wants to position Russia as a defender of the theoretical original intent of the UN and of a world where multilateral diplomacy is important. So, Russian diplomacy acts as though everyone was potentially able to be seriously involved in serious multilateral diplomacy in which everyone’s interests are acknowledged, even though they’re well aware that the US and its clients aren’t interested in that kind of thing. But as more and more clients have second thoughts about the decaying US hegemony, they’ll have another model to look to and a country, Russia, which has been championing that model and is clearly someone who can be dealt with productively. So all this acting as though the US or the EU were reasonable even though they clearly aren’t is just sowing seeds, signalling “We deal with people reasonably”.

      Articles talking as if EU non-participation is some kind of defeat are naive at best.

      • John Whitehot

        Your analysis is interesting, i agree.

      • Sinbad2

        I concur.

  • Carol Davidek-Waller

    The U.N. was established in order to give small nations a voice. The US has perverted the organization and is using it to crush those that oppose its dishonorable geopolitical ambitions. Shame, shame.

    • Sinbad2

      Sorry to disappoint you, but the UN was established by the victors of WWII, so they could control the world. Other nations were allowed to join, to give the appearance of allowing small nations a voice. If it had ever been designed to be democratic, the US and UK would never have allowed it to be created.

  • purplelibraryguy

    “Terrorists control about 60 percent of the province, which is located on
    the border with Turkey. The rest of it is in the hands of the
    opposition from the Syrian Free Army and Islamic radical groups, the
    largest of which are Ahrar al-Sham and the Nureddin al-Zingi Brigades,
    which cooperate with Ankara.
    other terrorists
    Fixed.

    • Gregory Casey

      Perfect!!

  • Spit

    I have a solution. So evil. So devious. Send the Russians this message.
    BOYCOTT the sale of all specialized metals. Instead, listen to this. SEND ALL OF IT TO CHINA, import low but passable chinese equivelant and send that to usa and EU… Learn what would it do tothe USA airforce and that openly publish everything. As for the EU, its not the eu. Its britain croatia and poland. BOYCOTT POLLAND AND FLOOD IT WITH CHINESE GOODS!!! TURN POLAND INTO chinese clay. Remind the world of how poland exterminated germans. Call the bluff! Get your boomers away from that missile!!!

    • Arthur Smith

      It sounds almost like you believe that economic-financial part of government in Russia is capable of acting independently from it’s globalist overlords, what’s up with that?

  • Hide Behind

    Let’s stop talking as if the European people’s as a whole are any less responsible for carnage in Syria and Southern part of our earth, they are and have been the recipients of the stolen wealth of those southern nations ever since days of colonial empires.
    No European nation could exist upon their own resources, they are not and cannot even be self suffecient enough to produce their food needs, let alone oil, gas nuclear fuel, or minerals necessary to feed industrial or needs of a fat welfare dependent societal needs.
    Much can be said for damn near every non Eurocentric nation in the UN, they to the man depend upon foreign finance to keep their elites in comfortable lifestyles.
    In fact some have to deprive own populace futures, as in locals not being able or able to afford and own the fruits of their labors.
    As to voting upon resolutions of humanitarian causes by UN member states. they get paid such as peacekeepers do, and to look good to their dumb as a rock populace, they publicly vote, all the while knowing their votes will be stopped by Security Council members; it is all F’n smoke and mirrors.
    In US days of segregation blacks were divided into two major classificationns, “House negros,( those who PERSONALY served and even helped administer over the second category ) the” Field Negros.
    The vast majority of National leaders and secretaries are no more than Eurocentric “House Negros”.
    In Eurocentrics nations, even back in segregation times, the wealthy used governments to oversee their field slaves.
    Who are the field slave, the world’s working poor.
    All the poor keep fighting each others best interest by following their masters orders, while their masters enrich themselves.
    Is their truly a black and white world, No, for it is a Brown, Black, Red and Yellow and versus the White owned world.
    Too bad the non whites keep trying to be White.

  • Fred

    The solution to the Syrian conflict is for the US, Britain, France, SA and Israel to stop supplying and paying their terrorist mercs, get the hell out of the country, and never come back, which the corrupt Rothschild run UN and West will never ever even suggest.
    For real peace and development in the world the first step should be for lesser nations to from an alliance entirely separate from the UN, who will respect and are willing to protect the sovereignty rights of all nations – leaving out entirely and particularly these five deceiving, warmongering, and exploiting nations, and anything to do with the Rothschild money system or influence.