Skip to main content

Syrian Cease-Fire? Nine Simple Questions.

By Joe Contrarian 

February 13, 2016 "Information Clearing House" - "Syrian War Update " - The cease fire should be very welcome news for millions of ordinary Syrians suffering from Western sponsored terrorist aggression, but closer examination of this and other relevant documents unfortunately created serious doubt about intentions and effectiveness of the agreement in achieving its goals.
Not going into many details of the agreement , linked below, I am asking some fundamental questions that have to be answered if we have to take the agreement for more that just meaningless illusion of peace, something that exhausted Syrian nation does not want or need.
  1. Why Russia supported UN Security Council Resolution 2254, adopted unanimously December 18, 2015   without clarifying legal status of NATO military operations in Syria under Syrian Law? On what legal basis US, French, British or Oman are bombing Syria?
  2. Why Russians or Iranians did not insist on clarification of legal basis under which Israel is bombing Syria and attacking Assad government in violation of UN charter?
  3. Why in UNSCR 2254 and in the Cease Fire Agreement, Russians or Iranians did not insist on clarification of legal status of Turkish aggression in Syria including shooting down lawfully operating Russian military airplane shelling Syrian territory or occupation of 1-2 mile wide sliver of of Syrian land along border?
  4. Why in the UNSCR 2254 and in the Cease Fire Agreement, Russians and/or Iranians did not call for withdrawal of unauthorized by Assad regime foreign military, including US troops from Syrian Kurdistan?
  5. Why in the UNSCR 2254 and in the Cease Fire Agreement, Russians and/or Iranians did not insist on explicit prohibition of introduction of any unauthorized by Syrian government foreign military forces on Syrian territory as a matter of confirmation of Syrian sovereignty and territorial integrity as UN charter requires.
  6. Why in the UNSCR 2254 and in the Cease fire Agreement, Russians and/or Iranians did not insist that no cease fire will be in effect for all those yet undefined “ moderate opposition groups” who have in their ranks foreign mercenaries, non-Syrian citizen, and why expulsion of such has not been required as a precondition to cease fire.
  7. Why Russians and/or Iranians did not insist on finalizing a list of terrorists organization excluded from the Cease fire Agreement before any cease fire implementation may begin since this political/technical issue make the Agreement unenforceable.
  8. Why Russians and/or Syrians did not insist on inclusion of Syrian Kurds in the negotiation, a vital force fighting terrorists.
  9. Should we understand that by signing the UNSCR 2254 and the Cease Fire Agreement Russia legalized NATO aggression against Assad if not why NATO aggression was not prohibited in the agreement although illegality of any aggression is a vital part of UN charter?
If this conclusion is true then the agreement is an illegal act, against UN charter and international law since the only legal representative government of Syria is the representative of Assad regime and the UNCR 2254 is not aimed against Assad regime and hence UNSC cannot infringe on Syrian sovereignty.
In fact quick read of the “agreement” make me realize that it is a meaningless, unenforceable on the ground in Syria, piece of paper that actually allows SAA to move against ISIL and seal Turkish border North of Aleppo but also allows the west preparation for plan B i.e  invasion of Syria. However, what it would surely do is to it provide fertile ground for western accusation of Russian/Syrians breaking the agreement we are so familiar with.
In fact it looks like that critical and so far successful SAA offensive in Idlib falls under the Cease Fire Agreement giving western propaganda a field day. Thank goodness the agreement to be implemented only upon specific local field commanders’ decisions reaching cease-fire along specific segments of the frontlines so it can take months.
But I already see those headlines: “NATO invasion inevitable since those barbaric Russians, breaking all the agreements and still killing all those unborn children”.
This whole fake agreement dangerously sets up Russians for propaganda ambush in million ways and inevitably leads to smuggling of western weaponry hidden inside humanitarian convoys and clandestine evacuation, or reinforcement of ANF and ISIL, true goal of the US in Munich.
Don’t you think that US and allies gave up on invasion by US and Turkey/Saudi. They play for time to rescue they terrorist brothers, while Russians want to deescalate tensions with Turkey they fueled among their population by media reports of preparations for the war.
Scared of empty Turkish and Saudi declarations of invasion?
So why Russia is bending backwards for the west knowing their cunning ways?
It did not work in Ukraine and will not work in Syria. Period.
Full text of the Cease Fire Agreement;
Before ink on my question number 3 of  this post was dry another act of aggression of Turkey against Assad allies Kurds, shelling SAA air base at Menagh.
Preparation for SAA offensive from Moon of Alabama.
South Front: Latest developments.
On Americans bombing of Aleppo 2 hospitals, blame Russians.
 An air Base taken over by Kurds in Mennah, N. Aleppo.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why States Still Use Barrel Bombs

Smoke ascends after a Syrian military helicopter allegedly dropped a barrel bomb over the city of Daraya on Jan. 31.(FADI DIRANI/AFP/Getty Images) Summary Barrel bombs are not especially effective weapons. They are often poorly constructed; they fail to detonate more often than other devices constructed for a similar purpose; and their lack of precision means they can have a disproportionate effect on civilian populations. However, combatants continue to use barrel bombs in conflicts, including in recent and ongoing conflicts in Africa and the Middle East, and they are ideally suited to the requirements of resource-poor states. Analysis Barrel bombs are improvised devices that contain explosive filling and shrapnel packed into a container, often in a cylindrical shape such as a barrel. The devices continue to be dropped on towns all over Syria . Indeed, there have been several documented cases of their use in Iraq over the past months, and residents of the city of Mosul, which was re...
Post a Comment
Read more

Russia Looks East for New Oil Markets

Click to Enlarge In the final years of the Soviet Union, Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev began orienting his foreign policy toward Asia in response to a rising Japan. Putin has also piloted a much-touted pivot to Asia, coinciding with renewed U.S. interest in the area. A good expression of intent was Russia's hosting of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in 2012 in Vladivostok, near Russia's borders with China and North Korea. Although its efforts in Asia have been limited by more direct interests in Russia's periphery and in Europe, Moscow recently has been able to look more to the east. Part of this renewed interest involves finding new export markets for Russian hydrocarbons. Russia's economy relies on energy exports, particularly crude oil and natural gas exported via pipeline to the West. However, Western Europe is diversifying its energy sources as new supplies come online out of a desire to reduce its dependence on Russian energy supplies . This has ...
Post a Comment
Read more

LONDON POLICE INDIRECTLY ENCOURAGE CRIMINALS TO ATTACK RUSSIAN DIPLOMATIC PROPERTY

ILLUSTRATIVE IMAGE A few days ago an unknown perpetrator trespassed on the territory of the Russian Trade Delegation in London, causing damage to the property and the vehicles belonging to the trade delegation , Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said during the September 12 press briefing. The diplomat revealed the response by the London police was discouraging. Police told that the case does not have any prospects and is likely to be closed. This was made despite the fact that the British law enforcement was provided with video surveillance tapes and detailed information shedding light on the incident. By this byehavior, British law inforcements indirectly encourage criminals to continue attacks on Russian diplomatic property in the UK. Zakharova’s statement on “Trespassing on the Russian Trade Mission premises in London” ( source ): During our briefings, we have repeatedly discussed compliance with the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, sp...
1 comment
Read more