Putin once again backs assad

In Ukraine, Putin backs the right of self-determination; in Syria, he backs state sovereignty, but the "West" is similarly schizophrenic or power-political

In the backlash of U.S. attacks on Islamic State targets in Syria and Iraq, the Assad regime is expanding its bombing of cities. Since the 20. October, the regime, according to the Syrian Observatory of Human Rights 1.755 airstrikes flown in which at least 527 civilians are reported to have been killed. The organization condemns the silence of the international public about these "Massacre". In fact, the Assad regime is no less cruel to civilians than the Islamic State.

Putin backs assad again

Aleppo after an air strike. Screenshot

Although Turkey is pushing to extend the war against IS to Assad, this is not echoed in the West. Here, the motto seems to be that the first thing to do is to eliminate the primary evil and tolerate the enemies of the enemies, especially since Iran is needed to stabilize the situation in Iraq, while Iran is also propping up Syria and Hezbollah, which is fighting in Syria. And behind Syria is Russia, which has its only naval base in the Mediterranean. The importance for Moscow of such bases in geopolitically important places is well known; after all, this was also a reason for quickly incorporating Crimea into the Russian Federation after the fall of Yanukovych, with whom a long-term agreement on the stationing of the Black Sea Fleet had been concluded.

Russian President Putin gave an interview to the Turkish news agency Anadolu before his visit to Turkey, in which he makes clear that he wants to strengthen economic relations with Turkey also because of the sanctions. Russia wants to increase agricultural imports from Turkey, the gas supply via the Blue Stream pipeline has already been extended to the maximum. The problem with Turkey is that Moscow continues to back Assad, who is fighting not only IS terrorism, but others as well "radical groups" in Syria, which were supported by the West. The fact that Assad himself terrorized the civilian population and dragged the country into the terrible war between meanwhile numerous factions is irrelevant for the power-strategically thinking Kremlin leader.

The "Fight against Terrorists and Extremists" is the primary task of the international community. This must be truncated on resolutions of the UN Security Council, so Putin with regard to the USA and the Verbundeten. Attention must be paid primarily to the "state sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of states". The interviewer failed to ask how this demand is compatible with the integration of Crimea and the situation in Eastern Ukraine.

Russia, Putin said, would support Syria, Iraq and other countries in the region in their fight against extremists, apparently regardless of how democratically legitimate the governments are and what means the respective security forces use. Putin, of course, does not say this, but instead swears that Russia has always worked toward a peaceful resolution of the conflict through an open dialogue among Syrians. How this is to be done in a dictatorship that has already bloodily attacked peaceful demonstrations and imprisoned, tortured and killed many people even before the protests, Putin does not reveal. He wants, where only the Islamists and probably Erdogan will contradict him, a "sovereign, united, sacular and democratic state in Syria" in Syria, where everyone can live peacefully and safely. Putin does not mention that Turkey itself is on the way to becoming an Islamic state.

Thus the fronts remain hardened, because all sides pursue only geopolitical and power-political interests, between which the people in Syria are crushed. Both Russia and the West rely on a military slogan; as in the Cold War, they fight for influence on satellite states or regions in Ukraine or Syria; freedom, democracy and human rights are not at stake. It’s called realpolitik, where you agree in practice to support Assad, because it’s about fighting terrorists and separatists and defending territorial integrity, however historically and coincidentally the formation of the state took place. However, one does not want to have anything to do with the consequences of the conflicts in which one interferes, but closes the borders to the war refugees.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *