Mr Johnson and the "British scientists" invited the Russians to the coalition
United Kingdom Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson proposed Moscow a deal to resolve the crisis in Syria. According to him, the Russians "still have time to be on the right side."
His statements were transmitted by a British newspaper. "The Telegraph".
Mr. Johnson supported his April theses with a ponderous argument: he made it clear to the Kremlin that the United States could deal another blow to Syria.
At the same time, the British Foreign Secretary blamed Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad, calling him an “arch-architect” and promised that the British and allied forces would gather evidence and start persecuting “war crimes perpetrators.”
The newspaper reminds that earlier Mr. Johnson canceled the planned visit to Moscow and threatened sanctions against Russia and Syria. However, these statements of him remained without consequences and even reached an impasse. The minister was embarrassed: the Germans and Italians refused to go for additional sanctions, at least until an investigation into the Syrian chemical weapon incident was carried out.
According to Johnson himself, chemical weapons in the province of Idlib applied Assad. Why applied? Johnson is confident that Assad is "terrible and indiscriminate." "In this sense, he is a true architect," says Johnson, "who is overwhelmed by such an indomitable thirst for revenge that he can never even hope to control his population again." “It is literally and metaphorically toxic, and this time Russia has awakened from this fact,” adds the British minister. “They [Russians] still have time to get on the right side ...”
According to Mr. Johnson, there is no doubt that the bomb fell from one of the two Syrian U-22 aircraft, which “took off from the airbase where the chemical weapon". According to him, "British scientists analyzed the samples of victims of the attack." a “positive result for sarin or a sarin-like substance” was obtained. “The United Kingdom, the United States and all our key allies are unanimous: we believe that this was most likely an attack by Assad on his own citizens using weapons with poisonous gas, which was banned by the Geneva Protocol almost 100 years ago, in 1925 year,” Johnson
The minister concludes that the Russians could “join the coalition from more than 60 countries united in the fight against“ Daesh ”(“ IG ”, banned in the Russian Federation), preserve their strategic interests in Syria with the prospect of more productive relations with President Trump and the realization that the West “will ultimately help rebuild the country” (Syria).
As for Assad, the Russians who "rescued him" now "can help eliminate him" through "a carefully controlled transition process that will preserve key state institutions." Then for Syria, there will come a "stable pluralistic future."
Johnson also made it clear to Assad that the US is ready for new strikes: “America has struck and, of course, can strike again.”
Johnson believes that it is vital for the Russian people to understand the "horrific nature of the regime that they support." He added that the current crisis "is, in fact, an opportunity for Russia," since Moscow "has reached the highest point of its influence in Syria." He believes that "now, of course, the time has come for them to make a reasonable compromise."
So, you don’t need to think long: Mr. Johnson openly and openly urged Moscow to join the American coalition, fight it against terrorists, and at the same time ensure that Assad leaves power. Bonus for Russians: the possible development of relations with the “hawk” Trump, who, if the occasion is right, can strike a second blow to Syria.
Oddly enough, we note that some British minister talks about the “more productive relations” of the Kremlin with President Trump. It seems that this minister is registered in London, and Trump - in Washington. And the latter is not the first to obey. Even the British queen cannot do anything about it.
And it is doubly strange when the minister, who has just suffered a political fiasco with the promotion of sanctions, argues on this. Fiasco internationally, at the level of the G7. Johnson's ideas about "punitive sanctions" against Moscow have not passed.
However, if you remember Mr. Johnson's excessive passion for a drink called whiskey, which he absorbs in the morning (sometimes) following the example of the great Churchill, then much will become clear. Probably, on Churchill this binge is similar only to his addiction to alcohol. Well, and still a reverent attitude to the "British scientists" mentioned above.
As to the notorious coalition, it has long been known that in Syria, the Syrian army, the VKS of the Russian Federation, Iran and Hezbollah are fighting against terrorists, and the United States, who are leading their coalition, belong to Iran and Hezbollah, to say the least, bad. Not better than Assad. How can Russia participate in such a coalition? One of the goals of this coalition is to overthrow Assad, and Trump perfectly showed it with his missile strike. If Russia joined the coalition, it would expand its policy in Syria 180 degrees. By the way, it would be very convenient for Turkey, Russia's forced partner in the Middle East. Assad was and remains the enemy of Erdogan, and the newly appeared Sultan would have been overwhelmed with joy at the turn of Russia. But there is no such reversal and is not expected.
On the other hand, it can be assumed that Johnson acted as the talking head of the White House, hired for a special occasion. This is the international sounding of the “global community” foreign policy vector. Such an assumption has a right to exist, however, we note that Mr. Trump has a highly contradictory character and makes unpredictable acts. It can watch TV - and hit it with rockets without bothering with evidence. Maybe listen to your daughter, can heed his son. To voice the alleged decisions of such a politician is a thankless task. You can make a mistake in 99 cases from 100.
However, Johnson to make mistakes and miss is not used to. Another interesting thing: if Russia had listened to Johnson’s excited voice, this person would have been a prominent mediator between Trump and Putin. A sort of new career start for Mr., who once wanted to become Prime Minister of Britain, but also here did not win. Such a start, however, Johnson will not make, because there is no reason to believe that Putin would suddenly curtail the operation in Syria or “give” Assad to the Americans, British, French and other predators.
By the way, experienced and restrained analysts of the East, in contrast to the over-excited Johnson, count them.that Washington "will not repeat" a blow following the example of what was directed against Assad "in response to a chemical attack."
Unless another political solution is found, Washington is likely to support a moderate Syrian opposition. Thus, pressure will be simultaneously exerted on the Assad regime and on Iran. This would allow to proceed to any "moderate political decision." However, in reality, such a strategy “will further complicate the situation” and lead to a large-scale civil war in Syria. But this will not allow Russia to happen, which, according to Abdulrahman al-Rashed, the former director general of the Al Arabiya News channel and the former editor-in-chief of Asharq Al-Awsat, “will not budge and will thus become a real peacemaker in Syria ".
Not the United States, and certainly not Britain, striving for peace in Syria (instead of peace, they have something “pluralistic”), but Russia. The only chance to resolve the crisis is to find at least something in common in the positions of the countries of the region. Even the impulsive Mr. Trump does not argue with such a strategy aimed at reconciliation. In contrast, Boris Johnson is ready to force Russia into the coalition ranks, almost blackmailing the Russians and Syrians with Trump’s missiles.
What for Johnson, chatter and newspaper, for Trump - historical creation. Peace in Syria could be a real historical milestone for Trump: he could then brag about his achievements and compare them with the failures of Obama's Nobel laureate.
There are, however, two big “buts”: first achievements, then boasting. And first the world in Syria, then the comparison with Obama. Peace, not bombing!
Information