During the sixth round of talks in Geneva failed to achieve notable progress on the issue of the Syrian crisis. We can say that the talks between the opposition and the regime of Bashar al-Assad to date has not even begun. Both sides are in dialogue with the UN representative that does not have sufficient authority in order to exert pressure on the regime and force it, realizing the essence of the question, to start direct cooperation, the aim of which is cherished political transition. Fairly obvious by the fact that the Russian want to get rid of the monitoring and control of the UN. To do this, they created a new direction — talks in Astana, far from the position of the Supreme Commission dealing with the issue of the Syrian settlement, which insists on the implementation of Security Council resolutions.
The high Commission has supported and been flexible in the process of interaction with Astana, as the conference focused on military matters and called for a cease-fire in Syria. However, the Russian who urged military groups for her part, surprised the military talking not only about the adoption of the new Syrian Constitution, but also about his vision of a new Syrian basic law. Of course, the military refused to hold political talks with Astana, as well as from the discussion of the Constitution. Eventually, the dialogue ended with the signing of the international agreement by all parties, except the Syrian, and received the name of “reducing tensions”.
© AP Photo, Sergei GritsУчастники talks in Astana
Despite the fact that it is not the goal to which we all aspire, namely, a complete ceasefire in the Syrian territory, we deemed this step is acceptable for the plight of our people suffering from the bombing. Perhaps if Iran was not one of the signatories to the agreement, we would find the strength to take further steps contributing to the strengthening of our trust, as provided in UN General Assembly resolution 2254.
Russia did not lose sight of the fact that all the Syrian people completely denies the existence of Iran and considers it an aggressor state. In addition, they believe that the Iranian authorities adhere to the expansionist and ideological plan that threatens the future of Syria and the entire region. Russia, in turn, according to the distribution of spheres of influence, forced to support military action of that state on Syrian soil, but she had to control the airspace. Surprisingly, Russia ignores glaring evidence that Iran is the source of the spread of terrorism and sponsor of ISIS (banned in Russia — approx. ed.), for example, everyone knows the story of the invasion of Mosul with the support of Nuri al-Maliki or financial support to al-Qaeda from Tehran. Despite all this, Moscow argues that Iran is fighting terrorism! The Syrian opposition showed flexibility in its dialogue with Russia, which is one of the largest countries with which we do not want the rise of military tension. In addition, we recognize its importance as a member of the Security Council, as well as the fact that it has international powers to find a political solution to the Syrian issue. However, the opposition, and Russia, during a conversation are unable to come to a common opinion, which would help to successfully resolve the crisis. This is exactly what I personally felt during our last meeting with Mr. Gatilov in Geneva.
The international community wants Russia to abandon support for the expansionist project of Iran. The summit in Riyadh, which was attended by Donald trump, once again confirms this fact. If Moscow will continue to support Iran, this will mean that she loses contact with all Arab and Islamic countries.
We know that Russia is ready to stage the cold war only to return important region in its sphere of influence in the international arena, however, she chose ally whom the world considers as the source of the terrorist threat.
Russia has hinted that she has made some progress in Astana, at the moment, as the talks in Geneva have failed. However, Moscow is responsible for this failure because she wants to put the cart before the horse when putting pressure on the international mediator is not to make a political transition, and in order to start negotiations on the adoption of the Constitution. We could take this to no one condemned us that we want to disrupt the negotiations. We also recognize the fact that there are advisers and experts who study the constitutional and legal problems in order to stop the political crisis that is directly linked to a major political transition.
Now our people are looking with concern on what you plan to do other countries. He feels fear and is concerned that international efforts to resolve the crisis in Syria will only lead to the process of dividing the country into spheres of influence. Of course, our people reject all of this. We can agree that the results of the Syrian revolution is the death and blood of a huge number of local residents of Syria, and, eventually, tear it into pieces and small States.
It is also possible that the Syrians recognize that Iran is the guarantor of their security or that he will continue to play a role in the future, even though he caused the deaths of thousands of Syrians. In addition, our people will not soothe the fact that Russia will intervene in the Affairs of the country, because he waits until she finally takes a neutral position or make sure that you need to help the Syrian people, not the criminal regime of Bashar Assad who is killing his people.
