Syria:
the Art of Standing on the Right Side of History
By Oriental Review
The ongoing Syrian crisis will be certainly viewed by future generations as a classic example of how a completely false reality, as presented by the dominant Western political class and corporate media, has inscrutably resulted in the moral and political reinforcement of the opposing party, which was desperately defending the principles of law and justice under unprecedented pressure from a transnational party of war.
By Oriental Review
The ongoing Syrian crisis will be certainly viewed by future generations as a classic example of how a completely false reality, as presented by the dominant Western political class and corporate media, has inscrutably resulted in the moral and political reinforcement of the opposing party, which was desperately defending the principles of law and justice under unprecedented pressure from a transnational party of war.
Despite
the undisguised skepticism
voiced on the eve of the summit in Lough-Erne by some of the
G8 leaders toward the Russian stance on the Syrian crisis, the
talks turned to be a diplomatic victory of Putin. He stood firm
in his position on Syria, while the Western leaders had to
accept the obvious: there is no way to oust President Assad from
his post by legal means. The G8 summit in Lough-Erne failed to
put political pressure on Bashar al-Assad for his alleged use of
chemical weapons against the rebels, nor was it able to obtain
Russia’s consent to additional UN Security Council actions in
favor of the Syrian opposition.
The tough
Russian position on Syria is increasingly in step with the
approaches of some sober-minded politicians in the West.
Zbignew Brzezinski, a well-known US political analyst and
statesman of Polish descent, who can hardly be suspected of
supporting Russian policies elsewhere, literally said in
an interview with MSNBC right on the eve of the G8 summit:
The West is absolutely engaging in mass propaganda by portraying the Syrian conflict as a fight for democracy when many of the rebels want anything but. They pledge allegiance to Al-Qaeda, explicitly call for Sharia law, kill thousands of Christians, use terrorist tactics yet our corrupt media and political class pretend arming them will produce democracy.
 |
It’s no
wonder that Putin’s commitment to bringing all parties of the
conflict to the negotiating table in Geneva without any
preliminary conditions as well as his straightforward replies
during a memorable press-conference with the British PM
David Cameron, got a positive response from a wide spectrum of
Western civil society.
Boris Johnson, a British Conservative and the incumbent
major of London,
specifically stated in an article for the Telegraph:
This is the moment for a total ceasefire, an end to the madness. It is time for the US, Russia, the EU, Turkey, Iran, Saudi and all the players to convene an intergovernmental conference to try to halt the carnage. We can’t use Syria as an arena for geopolitical point-scoring or muscle-flexing, and we won’t get a ceasefire by pressing weapons into the hands of maniacs.
His
viewpoint is shared by a large number of British
parliamentarians, both Conservatives and Labourites, who urge
Cameron not to initiate any arm deliveries to the Syrian
opposition without approval from parliament.
Gerald
Warner from the Scotsman
wrote last Sunday that Putin is increasingly admired in the
West for his firm attitude in defense of the principles of
international law in general and on the Syrian issue in
particular:
The new-found admiration for Putin is rooted in an appreciation of the contrast he presents to the politically correct wimps running the European Union and the United States. Last week’s G8 photographs said it all. The posturing “statesmen” who had been ordered by PR advisers to take off their ties in a pathetic effort to appear “relevant” – a bunch of dads dancing at the school disco – invited the mockery and contempt they duly received. Putin went along with the charade; but when it came to the substance – the demand for his endorsement of the Obama/Cameron/Hollande ambition to arm al-Qaeda in Syria – the response was an uncompromising, Molotov-style “Nyet!”
Repeated
references in the Western mainstream press that Al-Qaeda-linked
networks are dominating anti-Assad insurgency have been further
substantiated in recent weeks. For instance, a few days ago
Hans-Georg Maassen, the head of the German
counter-intelligence bureau,
told the Rheinische Post about 20 suspected jihadists who
had recently returned to Germany from Syria. He said it was
worrying that in the past eight months more than 60
self-proclaimed “holy warriors” had left Germany to take part in
jihad in Syria. “When they return, they are celebrated
as heroes by their circle. In a worst-case scenario, they come
back with a direct combat mission,” – stressed the chief of
the BFF.
A number
of jihadist web-sites including
Kavkaz Centre, which is operated from Finland, have recently
praised two Chechen “syahids” liquidated by Syrian
governmental forces near Aleppo several day ago. Those
interested in understanding the real motivation of the
“pro-democratic forces” in Syria can read the English
translation of their “martyrology”,
which is far from the aims proclaimed by the West.
The number
of atrocities and cruelties against the Syrian civil population
committed by such “holy warriors” is unprecedented. YouTube is
full of video footage of these crimes, with evidence enough to
convene a special international tribunal for the investigation
and prosecution of the perpetrators. But instead the
self-proclaimed “Friends of Syria” are engaged in a political
cover-up of the FSA and are channelling weapons to jihadists.
Obama’s administration is obviously hoping to retain control
over the “moderate” FSA command of
Salem Idris, but the futility of such expectations was
proved as far back as the war in Vietnam (e.g.
Ngo Dinh Diem scandal). They stepped on the same rake in
Afghanistan.
The White House is placing stakes on a renegade who has no
tangible support of any notable group in the Syrian society.
Persisting in blind ambition for regime change in Syria, the US
administration will yield no result but another war-torn area
with the US Marines protecting a stooge in Damascus.
The echo
of the Syrian conflict is already
fuelling religious tensions in Lebanon and other countries
in the region. The prolonged sectarian showdown in Iraq has
gained new momentum. It is very likely that
a new Sunni-Shia war has been designed by the global
elites who triggered the conflict in Syria more than two
years ago. The impact it would have in Europe and the United
States itself was no doubt foreseen and will be used
to further tighten the grip of electronic surveillance on
these societies.
The public
reaction in the West on Putin’s performance at the G8 suggests
that there exists a conscious or perhaps unconscious awareness
of this here. Putin has successfully adopted the trend to
reformat the matrix imposed on the minds in the West. Western
politicians are so entangled in their web of lies, particularly
on the Syrian issue, that a reasonable and straightforward
speech by the Russian leader based on irrefutable facts and
common sense could leave them dumb, curious, and stunned. And
the people are able to sense who is standing on the right side
of history.
By Andrey Fomin
© 2011-2012
Oriental Review
No comments:
Post a Comment