Author: VK
Damascus warned it that could strike at bases of militants in Lebanon if the Lebanese Army does not increase the protection of the common border, through which militants infiltrate deep into Syria. Meanwhile, at the end of last week, U.S. State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland said the United States was worried that Russia continues to support the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. In February, the European Union extended sanctions against Syria for three months, where there has been a civil war for two years.
Commenting on the consequences of the Syrian conflict for VK, director of the Center for Partnership of Civilizations (MGIMO) Veniamin Popov called the escalating Syrian crisis "a path to a disaster": "For two years, the country has been destroyed. But if we continue this conflict, it will mean that the war, first, would split Syria, second, would spill over the border, and no country would have any immunity. First of all, it is connected with the border states, that is, Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey, Iraq. The Kurdish problem is particularly important here. There are more than 30 million Kurds. They live in four countries. What will happen, if they almost do not allow the opposition to enter in their areas even now? They just resist. And then it will affect the Turkish Kurds, etc.", he said.
According to Popov, if the Syrian events have the same negative evelopment, they will lead to the dreaded regional disaster: "It would be impossible to put out the fire. We are currently creating a pain in the neck. And we always encourage all the actors, especially the Western powers, to realize at least a little to think about what kind of future we are facing. This is a terrible future. So now we need a political settlement. There is generally no other way but to politically address the issue. "
Regarding Iran's influence on Syrian developments, Veniamin Popov said: "I often hear from Arab leaders that Iran is not part of the solution but of the problem. This is not so. Without Iran there is no solution to these issues. We say that the Geneva-2 must be attended by a regional quartet, that is, Turkey and Iran, and Saudi Arabia, and Egypt. Otherwise, we cannot solve these problems, and it will be even more important to continue to Afghanistan, etc. Therefore, it is now the most important question, and if we do not resolve it now... They again begin to put some conditions, to try to keep Iran outside of the negotiations. This is counterproductive".
According to Vitali Naumkin, director of the Institute of Oriental Studies, “Russian public opinion - with different nuances – in general, indignantly treat those attempts to destabilize the situation by supporting armed groups who are fighting against the government, which last two years. And this fire leads to results that are painful to watch. We love this country, it is one of the most beautiful and wonderful countries in the Middle East with a lot of monuments ... Everyone knows! With the civilian population, it was possible to come to this country and feel very safe, quiet, go anywhere, where people of different faiths and ethnic groups lived in peace and felt safe. It is not our job to judge what the shortcomings in the management of the country were. I think each state can get some claim about what was done wrong. Today it is clear that all there is wrong, first and foremost because of this powerful intervention in the internal affairs of the country and the inability of forces both within the country and outside it to agree on how to stop this actual civil war and how to ensure that, as agreed in principle in Geneva, a national dialogue will be organized.
Why do those who now rely on the fact that it is imperative to overthrow the regime in Damascus continue to supply weapons and call for the increase to overthrow the regime - this is not clear. In Geneva, it was agreed that there would be a dialogue, that we needed to encourage the parties to this dialogue, that these parties must agree on a certain transitional period, on the principles discussed by everyone. There are prerequisites for such a dialogue today. I hardly think there is at least one reasonably minded Syrian, who likes what today is happening there. Today double standards against Syria are clearly manifested; world politics has always suffered from them and continues to suffer. When Syria is treated, for some reason, very differently than the other countries where the same human rights violations happen, which are said to be much more... I have already mentioned Cambodia, I can mention some Arab countries, I will not name them, which are not okay with either democracy or human rights. Why for Syria should be used completely different requirements, other criteria? Just because the world community did not like the policy pursued by President Assad? The nomination of these preconditions that the president must go, of course, leads the problem to a dead end. Today, among opposition there are people who think rationally, realistically. We know them, I will not repeat and give examples. But they cannot master the situation today, because the opposition remains fragmented. Among these groups, extremists gain more and more weight. The more weight they will gain, the more resistance from those who do not want to live under them, who do not want an alternative, because these people are scared, will be. Yes, the Syrian society today is split”.
Speaking of Syrian refugees, Naumkin said: “The fate of the refugees who fled from Syria today, but they did not flee from the regime but from the war, is quite sad. Because it is impossible to live there. I always remember when I talk with foreign colleagues, I say it to the Americans and Europeans, that you came in 2003 in Iraq and could not ensure the safety of the citizens of Iraq, a million refugees have gone to Syria, the Syrians gave refuge to these people, the refugees went to Jordan. And none somehow remembered, then, that both the Americans and NATO forces failed to provide security to these people. I'm not talking about the mass exodus of Christians from Iraq. Again, there is a double standard”.
