Two weeks of international media gossip about the beginning of the US military operation against Syria. Thierry Meyssan, condemned the machinations of General John Allen and his associates of sabotage US-Iranian agreement, this article shows the absurdity of such an operation and explained that the support given to Syria, Russia and China, is not subject to bargaining.
Gen. John Allen Aspen Security Forum
July 27 New York Times announced the creation of Washington and Ankara safe zone in Syria to protect Syrian refugees in Turkey [ 1 ]. After a while, Washington denied this information. In a previous article I mentioned that the New York Times was the victim of the intrigues of the Special Representative of the International Coalition Against LIH General John Allen and the interim government of Turkey [ 2 ]. I reminded him that Allen had already been convicted of two attempts to sabotage peace in Syria, in June 2012 and December 2014, and that President Obama intended to dismiss him from office three years ago, in September 2012
Many commentators have linked this information to the other, according to which the Pentagon gave the right to maintain a "moderate rebel" in the event of an attack on them, regardless of who the aggressor. In this they saw the long-awaited start of the NATO campaign against the Syrian Arab Republic.
However, such an interpretation is absurd, and the facts must be interpreted differently.
Contradictory statements and the actual facts
The international coalition said it would not strike the Syrian Arab army, and only by LIH, and now also on the Syrian al-Qaeda. In addition, it provides information on the flights of bombers and their future operations in the headquarters of the land forces of the Syrian Arab army through their Kurdish allies in the PDS. Thus, the coalition is guaranteed in advance that its planes would not be "earthy" Syrian air defenses, and she with the Syrian Arab Army the same enemy, but this coordination ends. As for foreigners, such work is risky, because they do not orient themselves in unfamiliar terrain, the Pentagon has prepared them to help 60 "moderate Syrian rebels." 54 of them were attacked by al-Qaeda as soon as entered the territory of Syria.
Officially, the British and the French are not involved in operations on the territory of Syria.However, we know that it is not. Over the last few months, the two States bombed LIH in Syria. A few days ago, the British Foreign Minister, speaking in the House of Commons, was forced to admit this truth [ 3 ]. His French counterpart, which is not subject to such political pressure continues to deny these facts. In addition, the British deployed 120 service points for the management of air strikes [ 4 ].
It is ridiculous to claim that the Pentagon with 60 militants Pentagon intends to win hundreds of thousands of soldiers of the Syrian Arab army and overthrow the power in the Republic. Their unique function - is part of the Coalition against LIH, and their only task - to determine the targets for bombers.
Of course, the statement said, according to remarks by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, it is not formulated clearly. A spokesman for the White House should be aware that it will be interpreted falsely, because of the desire of the Americans and some French and Turkish leaders to enter into an open war against Syria. It is possible that he chose to mislead opponents of the US-Iranian agreement.
In addition, the Pentagon is limited to omissions on the situation. Its 54 "moderate rebels" were attacked by al-Qaeda, but he defended them. Over the past few months, France, Saudi Arabia and Turkey are trying to rehabilitate the Al-Qaeda in Syria (Frente al Nosra) and make it a viable alternative LIH. Contrary to some commentators, striking both for LIH and al-Qaida, which in itself is new, the Pentagon actually relies on the Syrian Arab Republic, in accordance with the agreement on Iran.
And now back to the point. All this controversy, skillfully fabricated General Allen conference Aspen Security Forum and Turkey, it aims to convince the public that American politics has changed dramatically. Washington, they say, hesitated and did not enter into an open war against Syria, but now resolved. Therefore, Syria will soon be attacked in the same way as before Libya was attacked, and the world finally get rid of President Bashar al-Assad.
If only it was so, we would have entered into a new world war.
In fact, four times as Russia and China to veto a Security Council resolution, the alleged attack against Syria. Vetoing, Moscow and Beijing were not content with mere statements against these resolutions. They entered the diplomatic conflict with the authors of these projects. They reaffirmed their readiness to go to war against them if they will move to unilateral action.
The first veto on October 4, 2011, Washington was surprised. Second of 4 February 2012 forced him to refuse to act in Syria as well as in Libya. France, Qatar and Turkey, then decided to resume military operations in Syria and provided two other draft resolutions, 19 July 2012 and 22 May 2014 on the issue of the republic incriminated crimes against humanity. But they were also vetoed.
Statements of France, Qatar and Turkey that diplomats spare no effort to try to convince their Russian colleagues to abandon the Bashar al-Assad is nothing but nonsense. No more standing and recent statements by Barack Obama about the changes the positions of Russia and China. As to the American president, he moderated the ardor of his opponents when he negotiated with Iran.
But we are conducting are not talking about Iran. And the two powers, permanent members of the Security Council - Russia and China.
Russian and Chinese interests
The positions of Moscow and Beijing are neither bravado nor collusion dictatorships, as it is called in the West, authorities in these countries. They are due historically and are part of a global strategy for these countries. That's all you want, just do not bargaining.
Russia's presence in the Mediterranean and the Middle East is dependent on the goodwill of the authorities of Damascus, respecting all religions. It would be impossible in the event of coming to power of the Muslim Brotherhood or any other Islamic organization of this kind. So it was in the era of Empress Catherine II, who saw in Syria the key to the Middle East to Russia and President Putin thinks the same way. In addition, Russian citizens, mostly Orthodox, in solidarity with the Syrian Christians and Orthodox, and worry about them.
Of course, Russia is still unable to fully protect their interests. So, in 2005, she refused to take a port in Tartu and 30 kilometer strip along the coast for its fleet in the Mediterranean - Damascus hoped to prevent a war that Washington began to prepare well before the Arab Spring. But while in Russia after the collapse of the USSR there was no fleet in the Mediterranean. Today, she revives it, is once again becoming a sea power, and effectively uses port Tartu.
For further development of the Chinese economy is necessary to ensure a safe continental routes linking China with the Mediterranean. In the Middle Ages the Chinese paved the "Silk Road", which links the capital at the time of Xi'an with Damascus. The Umayyads, who created the Muslim religion, tried to keep the other local religions - Judaism, Christianity and mandeizm. Once they extended their power in Central Asia up to Xinjiang, they acted the same in regard to religions of the Far East. That is, they had nothing in common with the modern Islamic sectarianism. And today, every day in the Great Umayyad Mosque of Damascus pray representatives of different confessions, and one of her mosaics depicts a Chinese pagoda. To evolve, today's China is trying to restore the "Silk Road". For this purpose he has recently created an Asian investment bank (ABII).
But do not think that Syria's strategic support comes down to the fact that Moscow and Beijing could send troops to the country and to protect it from the jihadists, who bled her, - they have never done and will not do - but they do not allow western Powers to use their weapons for the destruction of the Syrian Arab Republic.
In the US, it is the dominant world power, because they are forced to carry out global trade, largely on sea routes, and with the support of the United Kingdom control them and ensure their safety.That's why Washington considers the main task of keeping his power suppressing any attempts pads continental trade routes [ 5 ]. Chaos in Iraq and the fall of Palmyra create barriers to trade routes through the south of the Eurasian continent, and chaos in Ukraine - in the north.
The Syrian conflict countries of the West and the Gulf appear on the side of the Muslim Brotherhood, while Russia and China supported the secular republic.
Illusions of France, Saudi Arabia and Turkey
The Turkish government, which is strongly not understand anything in politics, twice tried to force the United States to enter into open war. 11 May 2013, it condemned the terrorist attack in the town of Reyhanli, accusing him the Syrian intelligence services. Recep Tayyip Erdogan rushed headlong to President Obama and began to complain to him. But the latter had already been warned by the CIA that the attack that cost the life of 51 Turku and maim 140 people, was organized the Turkish secret service Millî İstihbarat Teşkilatı (MIT) with the help of a false flag operation. However, those responsible for the attack were forced to retire.
Four months later, August 21, 2013, Mr. Erdogan has organized with the support of the Elysee Palace ghouta chemical attack, near Damascus. But this operation was immediately disclosed to the British MI6, who did not hesitate to inform our American colleagues. However, after a professional performance in the House of Commons London and Paris left Ankara and Paris alone with their crimes and chatter.
One can argue about who wins, the Obama administration is protecting a new strategy for NATO, together with the Iranian Shiite clergy and their opponents, seeking to continue the policy shtraussovskuyu redrawing of the "Greater Middle East" and to create general chaos. But in any case, neither one nor the other did not move from the war with the help of the classic jihadist conflict. It is absurd to believe that Washington could plunge into a third world war against Russia and China with the sole aim to replace President Bashar al-Assad, the Muslim Brotherhood.