British expert: unlike the United States, Russia does not give up
After the defeat of the boilers and breaking the blockade in Deir-ez-Zor, the victory of the Syrian army, together with the Russian videoconferencing and the Iranian militia, became obvious, it would seem, to everyone. However, in the West, they try not to notice the successes of the Russians, and Trump, within the walls of the United Nations, generally attributed the victory in Syria to his beloved. However, something to be afraid to talk about in The Guardian or Der Spiegel is freely quoted, for example, in Africa. So one of the largest English-language publications - the newspaper New Vision publishes an article by the famous military historian, teacher of the British Royal Military Academy Sandhurst, the author of popular science books, who collaborates with 175 periodicals of 45 countries - Gwinn Dyer, who explains why Russia won in Syria
“This month marks two years since the Russian Air Force was sent to Syria in order to save the collapsing regime of Bashar al-Assad from collapse. In the west, at that time, the opinion was expressed endlessly that Moscow had made a monstrous mistake. "Russia's military actions are a further escalation of the conflict and will only add fuel to the fire of radicalization and extremism," the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey stated in a joint statement three days after the first Russian bombs were dropped. Angry, stupid Russians supported Assad, bombed the wrong opponent, bombed civilians, and launched a war without end.
Why did the Russians not listen to the recommendations of experts, primarily from the USA, who have more experience in playing wars to Muslims than anyone else? No one likes to be taught by him, but the Russians didn’t enter into any kind of controversy on this subject. They remained calm and continued to do what they were supposed to do. Two years later, they won. “All the conditions are ready for the final stage of the destruction of ISIS in Syria,” said General Alexander Lapin, commander of the Russian forces in Syria, and his words are true. Only certain areas of the cities of Raqqa and Deir-ez-Zour in the east of the country remain under the control of ISIS, and these cities will fall until the end of the year.
All that remains is to return the large enclave around Idlib in northeastern Syria, where an al-Qaeda branch called Jabhat al-Nusra now manages (this organization changes its name almost every month to hide its roots). But the Russians promised Assad to help return this territory as well. "The operation to destroy the ISIL and Jabhat al-Nusra militants in Syria will continue until they are completely and guaranteedly destroyed," General Lapin promised last week. The destruction of al-Nusra will be a large-scale event, but it is quite feasible, as former supporters of this Islamist organization in Turkey and Saudi Arabia, the group was denied support.In fact, the efforts of Russia and Iran to save Assad were so successful that the plan, which seemed incredible before, becomes a reality: all Syria will be re-united under the leadership of Assad, ”writes a British expert.
Having given away the obvious, Sir Gwynn proceeds to the story, and in fact, why Russia won there. “How did the Russians (and their Iranian allies, who provided most of the military support on land) win the war in two years, while the US unsuccessfully and vaguely tried to solve this issue from 2011 year? The Russians won, choosing cold-blooded realism, making a bet on the lesser evil (Assad), and then purposefully focusing on the military victory. The United States, which is equally disgusted with both sides of the conflict (Assad and the Islamists), spent years inventing or finding a third "moderate" force that never existed. Meanwhile, Russia and Iran simply openly supported the Assad regime (the Syrian army was separated from the collapse in a matter of months, when the Russians intervened in 2015, the year). They have been successful, and the States will eventually have to reel and go home.
What did Moscow receive in exchange for its intervention? First and foremost, it prevented the emergence of an Islamist state near its southern borders (about a tenth of the population of Russia is Muslim). In addition, the Russians have demonstrated that they can be a very useful ally for other regimes in distress. Unlike you, you know who, ”Dyer summed up the sad result.
If you discard the stamps about the “evil Assad”, the expert simply retold what our agency wrote about a year ago. In Syria, Russia is not just fighting terrorists, the operation in Syria was a continuation of the Munich speech - speaking openly against the plans of the United States and the West, our country gave hope to many people that the bombers from the “good empire” and the militants gathered by this empire have a counterweight. That same opportunity not to go on the path of Libya.
Shortly before the assassination in 2011, the Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi said: “Is there a law in the world allowing these murders? I will tell you: yes, there is. This is the Law of the Jungle. This is your law and your order. Four months, four months! - you bomb our country, and everyone is afraid to even say words of condemnation. If Russia was still in the world, real Russia, united and great Russia, defending the weak, you would not dare. But it is not, it is not, and you triumph. " In 2011, the country was led by Dmitry Medvedev, who built an "overload" and dreamed of building Russia into a western project. And Russia signed a resolution that allowed NATO to bomb Libya. It will take 6 years and the West screams hysterically - the Russians are back. The Russians, who did not allow them to exterminate their people in the Donbas, defended the Syrians and, piece by piece, create, together with free nations, a new world, where there will be no “chosen nations” who can exterminate peoples in their mood. And the gentlemen from the United States, even from Britain, will have to accept this as a fact.