During a video bridge between Moscow-Berlin on the theme: "The situation in Syria. Possible scenarios of development" Russian and German experts discuss the recent UN Security Council resolution on Syria which has been vetoed by Russia and China.
Igor Panarin, MSU professor, PhD in political science stated that Germany should be interested in peace in Syria more than other countries. The visit of Lavrov and Fradkov was well-timed and successful. We could see hundreds of thousands residents of Damascus, who greeted the Russian delegation. Russia is making colossal efforts to prevent a war in Syria, which might lead to a war in the whole of the Middle East. In this context, the visit shows the readiness of Russia to be a mediator and help the Syrian population to establish dialogue between various political forces within Syria. Russia took the only possible decision to prevent Damascus turning into Stalingrad. I remind you that the birthplace of Muhammar Gaddafi, Sirt, was almost turned into Stalingrad by NATO air-attacks, you can see videos on the Internet. The visit of the Russian diplomats is one of the last stop-gaps on the way to war.
Wolfgang Richter, senior scientist of the fund Science and Policy noted that although we are talking about preventing war in Syria and in the whole region, we should admit that there is a war in Syria already. It shouldn’t be hushed up. We can see that the government forces use artillery to fire into some districts of the city. This force should be stopped. Russia rightly said that we need to prevent military intervention from outside, but no one is against this direction. The purpose of international democracy was not military intervention. If you look at the draft resolution which was accepted by 13 states and vetoed only by Russia and China, it does not reflect these concerns and doubts. The purpose of the resolution is not to use force. Many delegations stated that it will not happen according to Chapter 7 of the UN Charter. We are talking about tougher sanctions to stop the violence. I think that in this respect, the resolution is very balanced. It seems that Russia has isolated itself. She did not listen to the voices of the Arab League member states; we must not forget that the resolution was proposed by Morocco on behalf of the League. The actions of the Security Council were absolutely legitimate, there is no point in the resolution requiring the resignation of President Assad. There is an inherent requirement for a democratic transition process, which includes all population groups. This is a very balanced draft, and Russia could have agreed with it.
Igor Panarin did not agree with the opinion of his German colleague, calling such arguments the result of misinformation of world public opinion. All materials that tell about the alleged atrocities of the Assad regime originate from the US, where American citizens call themselves Syrians and spread information about civilian casualties, as well as from London, where the information is spread by alleged Syrian human rights organizations. In Qatar, which is actively involved in the information war against Syria and against Europe, special pavilions representing Tripoli have been built. Why is Russia against the resolution on Syria? Because as soon as the resolution was adopted by Libya, NATO aircraft immediately began bombing Libya. There is also the example of Iraq. The US threatens Russia and China to establish another government in Syria when they come to power and put more pressure on Russia and China. With the same tenacity the US Secretary of State Colin Powell argued at a meeting of the UN that Iraq has chemical weapons. When talking about protecting the rights of the civilian population, the given numbers are between 1 million and 1.5 million victims among the civilian population of Iraq, 5 million refugees, 7 million street children in Iraq, plus the slave trade. Is this the result of democracy and concern for human rights in Iraq? Damascus was the capital of the Arab Caliphate. Then it became Baghdad. Baghdad has been almost destroyed as a result of military occupation. I do not want Damascus to be in that terrible situation. The only salvation for Europe is the alliance of Russia and Germany. The war in Syria, aimed at the destruction of the Russian-German alliance, and the key to peace lies not only in Moscow but also in Berlin.
Wolfgang Richter replied to this that the debates on Syria are accompanied by a return to the "bloc mentality". Efforts should be made to realize the promises that ensure European collective security. The OSCE, Germany and Russia are taking part in various activities in this direction. Countries should not become a victim of this thinking so that it would not lead to the events in Paris in 1999. As for Syria, the Syrian government is to blame for the escalation of the conflict. When there are demonstrations, involving thousands of people, which occur almost peacefully, the government forces are suppressing them. This is a disproportionate use of force. I do not want to say that black is white and vice versa. Of course, there are some groups that carry out violence from both sides. But the spiral of escalation should not lead to the shooting of entire neighborhoods of the city.
Senior Fellow, Center for Arab and Islamic Studies, Institute of Oriental Studies, Academy of Sciences Boris Dolgov, who twice visited Syria and traveled to Damascus, Hama and Homs, said that he saw massive support for the leadership of Bashar al-Assad on the part of the population. "We saw rallies, which gathered tens of thousands of people (mostly it was youth) who supported al-Assad. This support is confirmed by the current events in Syria. In two major cities of Syria, Damascus and Aleppo, there are virtually no protests. There are only protests around Damascus, but rather between Alawite and Sunni villages, and such collisions cannot be considered an "armed conflict". And these are the cities where almost half the population of Syria lives -10 million people. In these urban areas there are the business elite, the most culturally advanced part of the Syrian intelligentsia. This confirms that the majority of the population supports the current leadership. According to the experts of our institute, about 60% of the population now supports Syria's Assad leadership."
The expert also highlighted the fact that if at the beginning of the conflict in March-April 2011, the population in fact demanded immediate social and economic reforms, democratization and the immediate withdrawal of the ruling regime, now the situation has changed radically, and now you can see deliberate terrorist and diversionary activities. Dolgov provided examples of such activity: explosions on the railways, on oil pipelines and in the streets of Damascus that have killed dozens of innocent people. Such development forces the intelligentsia, the part of the civilian population that stood for immediate democratization and the change of regime, now requires the regime to stabilize the situation and ensure security. That is, security first, and only then reforms. We spoke with many representatives of the intelligentsia, the Christian community, opposition political parties, and absolutely all of our interviewees argued that Syria now has a security problem, a problem of the suppression of armed groups who are terrorizing the population.
Of course, there are socio-economic and political problems in Syria. The political system is not perfect there: the president is elected at a referendum, the candidate is offered by the ruling party and there are no alternative candidates. But I remind you that now in Syria there are a number of new laws: on the general elections, a multi-party system, media and local government. These are all the laws required by the opposition, which really wanted democratic development. In February and March a referendum on the new constitution, the text of which is now being prepared by a special committee, will be conducted. Representatives of the opposition will participate in the work of this committee.
So why aren't we addressing the question of the armed groups present at the moment in Syria, which was recently posed by Lavrov? The opposition consists of completely different forces, but the most structured part of it are the Islamists. This is the "Muslim Brotherhood" and more radical forces. I agree that as a result of the overthrow of the Assad regime there will be chaos first, then the radical Islamist forces will come to power. Then we have the same situation that we are now seeing in Libya: a struggle for power, proliferation of radical Islamist training camps - including those of Al-Qaeda ... The same situation, in my opinion, will happen in Syria if the Assad regime is overthrown.
Researcher of the "Science and Politics" Fund, Margarete Klein:
It is important to present a complete picture of the situation. This conflict is not only between Assad and the opposition, there is also an ethnic conflict. But the findings that only Assad can prevent civil war are not true: a civil war is actually already going on. I think that the more the government uses force, the less likely a scenario of reconciliation will be. After the visit of Lavrov, Assad announced political reforms. Of course, this is a very important step, but Assad declared these reforms even before, but never followed them through. Such a "declaration of policy" cannot appease the opposition.
Talking about Turkey's role in the Syrian crisis, Boris Dolgov stressed its extreme importance. Turkey has its own strategic interests in the conflict. For 400 years, Syria was part of the Ottoman Empire, and the current leadership of Turkey is positioning itself as the heir to the empire. There are some insignificant territorial problems, such as the former Alexandret Sanjak, which is now a part of Syria. This issue is not settled, though it is not the main problem in relations between Turkey and Syria. The current Turkish leadership came from the association of the "Muslim Brotherhood", and now there is an "Islamic orientation" in Turkish contemporary politics. The Turkish "Muslim Brotherhood" has some contacts with the Syrian "Muslim Brothers"...
In terms of global policy, Turkey is positioning itself as a leader (or almost the only leader) of the Islamic, or at least the Sunni world. In the region Turkey competes in this regard with Iran. In other words, Turkey in many ways looks at Syria through the prism of the fact that Syria is an ally of Iran. Recently, however, there were meetings between representatives of Turkey and Iran at the level of deputy foreign ministers, Iran offered to mediate in resolving the conflict between Turkey and Syria. Such negotiations may be underway, so now, this situation may change.
I want to remind you that Russia and Syria have long-standing historical ties, since the Russian Empire. These links are present in the economic, politico-military and humanitarian spheres. There are many mixed marriages. Yes, Russia has specific strategic interests in Syria, and a military base, and economic interests ... But for the great powers their national interests have always played a crucial role, and we cannot say that any power has simply only "humanitarian interests" and nothing else. The NATO countries, Arab states, neighboring countries of Syria, and of course Russia, all have their political interests in Syria and it is the inevitable law of global politics.
Author: VK
