As it is known, the noble goal of Russian diplomacy is to achieve a kind of political agreement between the government and the sane, secular, patriotic opposition as soon as possible, to help them to unite in order to fight terrorists in parallel with a political settlement. However, there must be no place in this negotiation process in Syria for such structures as Dzhabhat en-Nusra, Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant and other spin-offs of Al-Qaeda.
In addition, according to Mr. Lavrov, Moscow has many concerns about the newly created structure called the Islamic Front, which includes two or three organizations directly involved in the massacre near Adra. It is very hard to imagine that any such structures can become a partner in the peace negotiations. Militants move between the Islamic Front, Dzhabhat en-Nusra, Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant like in communicating vessels – they go to those who pay more. The claims that it is possible to talk with a militant, right after he has joined the Islamic Front, are simply deceptive.
The correctness of Russian course and its assessment of the talks was confirmed by Lakhdar Brahimi, special envoy of the UN and the Arab League, who told reporters that although the talks “had not achieved much”, they would be continued. “I want to say again that we had never expected any miracles, there are no miracles here,” he said at a press conference. “I expect this conference to stop an unjust war. However, I know this will not happen today or tomorrow, or next week.”
There is also the first positive practical result of the negotiations between the Damascus government and the Syrian opposition in Geneva – to allow women and children to leave the area of the city of Homs, blocked by government forces. The issue of opening humanitarian corridors to deliver aid to the needy in this city was also discussed during the talks. At the same time, as reported by the website of Qatari TV channel Al Jazeera, the opposition demanded a stop to the blockade of Homs completely.
Another topic discussed in Geneva was the issue of releasing political prisoners, whose number, according to the opposition, reaches 50,000. The delegation of official Damascus demanded from the opposition a list of those it was asking to be released. According to Deputy Foreign Minister Faisal Miqdad, a member of the government delegation, the opposition had provided a similar list in the past, yet then it turned out that many of the people mentioned there had not been detained at all, and many of the detainees had been released long ago.
True to its international obligations, Damascus removed another batch of chemical weapons components on January 27. Hazardous substances were removed by Dutch and Norwegian cargo ships, escorted by ships provided by Denmark, China, Norway and Russia. According to the joint mission of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and the UN, its staff inspected the components of Syrian chemical weapons before loading them onto Dutch and Norwegian cargo ships at the port of Latakia (Syria). They set sail from the shores of Syria under the escort of naval forces of Denmark, China, Norway and Russia. “The joint mission hopes that Syria will continue its efforts aimed at timely removal of all chemical weapons and components, ensuring the safety of the process in accordance with the resolution of the Executive Council of the OPCW and the UN Security Council Resolution,” reads the statement.
While Damascus is fulfilling its international obligations accurately and honestly, and Russia is doing everything possible to place this slaughter in the direction of peace negotiations, the West, and primarily the United States, is holding a somewhat different position. It has just been reported that the U.S. Congress has approved the supply of small arms, many types of missiles and a financial aid to the so-called “moderate” insurgents. The Reuters news agency has emphasized that the U.S. will provide the Syrian opposition primarily with anti-tank missiles and other types of weapons, but nothing is still known about any surface-to-air missile systems (i.e., MANPAD), which can be used to destroy military or civilian aircraft.
In addition, the lawmakers voted behind closed doors on providing financing support to the opposition forces until September 30 this year – until the end of the fiscal year in the United States. Unfortunately, it is not known what amounts and which Syrian groups will receive this support.
Providing an unconditional U.S. support to Syrian opposition insurgents, most of which are connected with the terrorist organization of Al-Qaeda, one way or another, is not a wise policy, says Michael McCaul, the head of the National Security Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives. “Today, when we know that more than half of the people fighting on the side of the opposition are connected with Al-Qaeda to a greater or lesser extent, I would say that this position –unconditional support given to the insurgents – is at the very least an unwise policy,” said Mr. McCaul. At the same time, the congressional representative noted that such support from the United States made sense before, because the opposition was not as fragmented as it is today, and it included a greater number of moderate representatives. At the same time, Mr. McCaul stressed that the U.S. had no sympathy towards the current president Bashar al-Assad, taking a stand in favor of his resignation.
The U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry repeated his ritual words in Montreux: “Assad must go, and then we will talk.” However, at the same time, he spoke in favor of the preservation of the Syrian Army and the government. In my opinion, Americans have never said this before. There is a theory that they have fouled up in Iraq so much, that they will say the right things now, but there will also be concrete actions aimed at resolving the crisis in Syria.
By the way, we should remind these gentlemen that B. Assad was elected through direct democratic elections by the majority of Syrians. However, democratic elections do not satisfy the American hawks, who are trying to remove the legitimately elected President and replace him with a docile puppet, using the unbridled opposition, representing only a small number of Syrians, just as it is a case in Ukraine. Moreover, we can see on the example of Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya what the consequences are to people. These countries have been destroyed, civil wars are going on there, and the locals escape abroad to live in refugee camps. Is this the destiny of the world in the beginning of the 21st century?
Going back to the negotiations, it must be admitted that a very complex process has been started, and the fact that we have managed to hold the inaugural meeting of the Geneva-2 is very positive. Syrian sides have agreed to sit at the negotiating table, despite all the recriminations, for the first time in three years of this bloody conflict, which has resulted in probably the most difficult humanitarian situation in the world. Everything will depend on how the dialogue goes. Moscow expects that UN members – as mediators in these negotiations – represented by Lakhdar Brahimi, Special Representative of the UN and the Arab League, will do everything possible, using their diplomatic skills and experience, not just to keep the parties at the negotiating table, but to encourage them to find mutual understanding – step by step. It is quite clear that all problems can be resolved and the slaughter can be stopped only through negotiations.
Victor Mikhin, correspondent member of RANS, exclusively for the online magazine New Eastern Outlook
