Last weekend the special commission of the UN returned from Syria with collected materials from the place of possible usage of chemical weaponry and stated that it would take no less than three weeks to their analysis. At the same time, the US President Barack Obama said that the decision was made and the U.S. would launch a military operation against Bashar Assad, even if the UN SC would be against it.
The president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems Leonid Ivashov, the advisor of the deputy chairman of the FC of Russia Andrey Baklanov, and Pr. Leonid Syukiyanen gathered at a round table to discuss the Syrian conflict.
“The world is at the threshold of a big disaster,” Leonod Ivashov warned, comparing the American activity with Hitler’s behavior in the 1930s. “The UK and France support the U.S., like Germany in times of the Munich Treaty – fascism comes back to Western civilization!”
Ivashov explained that Bashar Assad offered much more to the Syrian opposition at the beginning of the conflict than it demanded; and the society of the country was ready to be involved in peaceful changes. However, he stated, ambassadors of the U.S., France and the UK went to militants and urged them not to agree to peaceful reforms and overthrow the regime.
Andrey Baklanov stated: “Syria is an important country in the region, like a brick because of which the whole building can be destroyed.” According to experts, there are three variants of destroying the building: under a conservative scenario the postwar system (when the UN and the SC don’t fulfil their functions well) will fade away fast. Under a reformist scenario other international integration structures will develop, while the UN will remain. Under an anarchic scenario the whole system of international relations would collapse, and the world will return to chaos and be far from a civilized course.
Syukiyan thinks that the key goal is to make all sides conduct a dialogue. “When ordinary people fight, others make them stop first, and then reasons for the fight are found out,” he said.
According to him, a lot is explained by the fact that the international public opinion doesn’t know Russian arguments well, even pro-Russian mass media know them poorly. Syukiyan suggested establishing an information pool to change the situation. “We underestimate public opinion in many countries. People want explanations,” he stressed.
