Syria: who has the influence to end the fighting?

Syria: who has the influence to end the fighting?

Aid corridor (allegedly in Eastern Ghouta or Aleppo after all)?). Photo: propaganda/Twitter

"Ceasefire apparently broken". From the militias’ treatment of civilians and coverage of Eastern Ghouta

Today, the UN Security Council meets to discuss the humanitarian situation in Eastern Ghouta. Expect an overview of the situation from British UN aid coordinator Mark Lowcock, to be followed by discussions and disagreements similar to those experienced by his handler at OCHA, Stephen O’Brien, in the summer of 2016 during the war over Aleppo.

Even then, there was gross disagreement about who was violating the agreed ceasefire, who was preventing humanitarian supplies, and how to assess the armed militias (cf. Aleppo: The Staging of al-Qaeda). If you look at a Tagesschau report on the current situation, it is not much different from the clashes in Aleppo.

accuse Russia "Rebels", that these described the corridors of escape. "Opposition groups contradicted the reports. The Islamist militia Jaysh al-Islam declared that the escape corridor had not been shelled" , reports the Tagesschau, mentioning that the Syrian air force has dropped barrel bombs.

From attacks of the "Insurgents" is not mentioned. The responsibility for the fighting lies mainly with the Russian government, the reader of the Tageschau report written by the ARD correspondent in Cairo learns.

The U.S. government called on Moscow to exert its influence over Syria and enforce an immediate end to the Syrian offensive. "Russia has the influence to stop these operations", said the spokeswoman of the US Department of Defense, Heather Nauert.

Tagesschau

Rough parts of the picture are missing

Here is an essential part missing to the full picture. If you look at the history of the development of the militias that dominate Eastern Ghouta, Jaysh al-Islam (Islamic Army), Failaq al-Rahman, and Ahrar al-Sham, you will see that Jaysh al-Islam and Ahrar al-Sham have been powerfully supported by states in the U.S.-led coalition: Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Kuwait, and Qatar.

One can ame, without going far out on a limb, that this support did not escape the U.S. government and was done with its consent, and in some cases, when it came to CIA permission to supply weapons, with its support.

The simplest conclusion, without even mentioning the militias’ links to al-Qaeda, is that only with the support of U.S. allies and the U.S. as the determining power in the rear, they became strong enough to start the war with the Syrian government.

The responsibility of the USA

To "Responsibility"The U.S., if the above quote by Heather Nauert is to be taken seriously, also had the influence to de-escalate the conflict to the point where a nationwide ceasefire in Syria would not be a problem.

If, as President Trump announced at the beginning of his term, and as all UN Security Council resolutions on Syria call for, they were to cooperate in the fight against IS and al-Qaeda, militias with any connection to the jihadists had little chance of military success.

There are political and military priorities that make such cooperation seem impossible and unrealistic. For the U.S., Syria is about a war against Iran, against the Syrian government, and about the dominance conflict with Russia.

This stands in the way of a rough and probably successful cooperation in the fight against terrorism and at the same time justifies the support of the USA and its allies for groups that are not wanted in their own countries. How members of Ahrar al-Sham are treated as terrorists by Western courts.

With the extremists of the IS e.g.B. in the Deir ez-Zor region have long been treated opportunistically: If they can prevent or halt strategically important territorial gains on the part of the Syrian army and its allies and facilitate their own territorial gains, they are granted freedom of movement in various ways, by being granted free withdrawal from contested zones or not necessarily fighting them despite information from U.S. reconnaissance.

This is the frame, which omitting, gives a skewed picture of the war conditions in Syria.

Dispute over aid corridors

Jaysh al-Islam and Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov are currently at odds over the aid corridors in Eastern Ghouta. The leader of the "Islamic Army", Mohammed Alloush, according to the TASS news agency (and other sources), insists that no civilians should leave Eastern Ghouta.

The Russian head of office, on the other hand, referred to the resolution adopted on Saturday, point 10 of which stipulates that civilians should be allowed to move freely. The wording in the original text indicates what the Russian UN ambassador had already pointed out: The resolution leaves a lot of room for interpretation. Those involved will take advantage of this.

Leave a Reply

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