In recent days, diplomats and politicians have not moved a jot in the "settlement" of the Syrian crisis. No matter how verbose those who care about the urgent building of democracy in Syria, the strategic initiative is in the hands of Syrian President Bashar Assad - and this is well understood in the SNA, in the SSA, and in the White House, and in Western Europe. And even the upcoming meeting of the "Friends of Syria", scheduled for 1 April - the beginning of the Turkish holiday season, and at the same time the day of all liars - will not fix the situation with the "settlement". Everyone knows that there is only one way to end the fighting in Syria - stop the round-the-clock outpouring of verbal democratic initiatives that have only one goal: to add fuel to the fire. For without the support of the West — if only verbal, to which this very West is a great master — the retreating rebel terrorists would have long since fled.
Bashar Asad will continue to bend his line. He knows what he is doing. Opinion of Yevgeny Satanovsky, President of the Institute of the Middle East:
“Assad - while - replays his opponents. He managed to clear bridgeheads in the cities, as a result, there is no territory in Syria where you can organize something, call it something government, and demand the introduction of a no-fly zone to protect this government. The confrontation in Syria turned into a partisan, in a state of "normal" civil war.
In addition, Bashar Asad understands that in the event of his overthrowing, fate will not only be sad, but tragic. That as soon as he begins to hesitate - he is finished, his family is finished, the end to all Alawites, and indeed to the country. The example of Libya clearly showed it, and after the destruction of Gaddafi, any ruler who is overthrown feels driven into a corner. Therefore, Assad will fight to the end.
Assad quite successfully arranged with various groups on his territory, on which he could rely. He took control of the criminals, who realized that if radicals came to power, they would lose everything. And in the Kurdish areas, Assad gave free rein to the Kurdish Workers' Party.
It was a completely brilliant move: in this way, Asad neutralized the Turks and cut off the supply channels. weapons through Kurdistan - and these were the main channels ... "(source: "Free Press", Andrei Polunin).
Neither the Russian nor the Chinese position on Syria, too, will not change - so that there world diplomacy does not declare a "rapprochement" of positions.
“I think that they, too, resolutely turned towards giving up any support for the violence that the Assad regime is doing” (source: Rosbalt). So said Victoria Nuland, the official representative of the US State Department. “They” are Chinese. That is, Nuland believes that "China stops supporting Syrian President Bashar Assad" (the same source). Meanwhile, Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said only: “China highly appreciates and supports Annan’s mediation efforts and hopes that his visit to Beijing and holding talks with Chinese representatives will help achieve a political settlement in Syria” (the same source).
Earlier, in mid-March, Victoria Nuland noted “positive changes” in the position of Russia. RBC cites her words, published on the website of the US Foreign Ministry: “The five-point plan developed by Russia together with the League of Arab States (LAS) to resolve the situation in Syria demonstrates positive changes in the position of the Russian Federation. The gap between our points of view is narrowing. Now you can hear the statements of both Russia and China that these countries are not interested in the defense of B. Assad, that they are not interested in anything other than the cessation of violence. This goal has not yet been achieved, but we are working on it, and there is more and more unanimity in our actions. ”
In short, diplomats talk about diplomacy, from time to time wishful thinking, and events in Syria go on as usual.
Armed interference in the internal affairs of Syria, too, will not.
First, the The presidential election is not far off in the US, and Barack Obama is the only one who previously has more than 50% votes. The rather belligerent Mitt Romney is the most popular Republican candidate, only 43% of voters in his rating can boast, while the relatively peaceful Obama is ten percentage points ahead - he has 53% of votes. And if Romney considers Russia to be enemy No. XXUMX for the USA (see more details here), Obama is used to express himself more carefully, and even the expressive Hillary Clinton will not confuse him.
For example, after a recent meeting in Seoul with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, Obama said: “Despite the fact that there are certain difficulties in our approaches to this problem, especially during several months (probably the“ last few. ”- O. Ch.), We agreed that we should support the mission of Kofi Annan, who is going to try to put an end to the bloodshed in Syria and move towards creating such a mechanism that would allow the Syrian people to have truly legitimate teley, have a legitimate government "(source: "Sight").
Hillary Clinton will not be confused by Sergey Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister.
“Today I told Mr. Lavrov that it is impossible to equate violence by Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad to the actions of the population, which is forced to resort to self-defense ... We cannot expect defenseless citizens subjected to shelling to stop resistance before the Al-Assad regime takes any specific steps, ”Mrs. Clinton assured.
Meanwhile, in Syria, “defenseless citizens subjected to artillery shelling”, with ill-concealed impatience, are waiting for an opportunity to eliminate Assad according to the Libyan scenario - with the help of Western armies. Reuters reported on Tuesday that a representative of the opposition Syrian National Council (SNC), George Sabra, called on Western and Arab countries for military intervention in Syria to overthrow President Bashar al-Assad. In addition, he called for the establishment of a no-fly zone in the airspace of the republic.
“We insist on military intervention in Western and Arab countries in order to protect civilians. In addition, we demand the organization of humanitarian corridors and no-fly zones to ensure the safety of citizens and to prevent the massacre, which is organized by Bashar Asad, "said Sabra" (source: "Free Press", Andrei Polunin).
Lavrov does not sing along with the US Secretary of State, and certainly does not perform the second part in this diplomatic duet. In an interview with the “Vesti on Saturday” program with Sergey Brilev, the head of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation clearly expressed the Russian position:
“The envoy of the UN Secretary General / LAS on Syria, Kofi Annan, conveyed his proposals to the Syrian leadership. I can assure you that they are not talking about leaving Bashar al-Assad (President - Ed.). I believe that the question of the future of Syria should be decided by the Syrians themselves. Russia will support any agreement formulated on the basis of the all-Syrian political dialogue between the government and all opposition groups ”(source: "Actual Comments").
As for Hillary Clinton, she seems to be not at the same time as the Obama team, but against her. He must believe in the election victory of Mitt Romney (who promises not to cut, but to increase military spending), who will also need a secretary of state. With experience.
Clinton echoes, alas, not Obama, but the tireless Senator John McCain, famous for his political extravagance. Quote:
“Republican John McCain and his five fellow senators came up with a new resolution on Syria. According to the AP, the document strongly condemns the actions of the Syrian leadership and points to an unacceptable situation with human rights in the Arab Republic.
The initiative was supported by his fellow party members Lindsey Graham, John Cool, Kelly Ayotte and John Hoven, as well as Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman. They called on the White House to begin immediately supplying the Syrian opposition with “weapons and other material support,” which will allow the rebels to oppose government forces. The senators are confident that such deliveries in the short term will remove from the agenda talks about air strikes on the Syrian territory ”(source: Rosbalt).
Second, the Syrian "friends", like the militants acting against the Assad army, are scattered today just as they were yesterday, and all their new agreements are formal rather than meaningful. Quote:
“The conference of the Syrian opposition, which was held on the eve in Istanbul, and initiated by the Syrian National Council (SNS), was not able to gather the whole range of resistance representatives. The idea of the two-day meeting was to develop a national pact that would include goals and objectives shared by all groups, but the Syrian National Coordinating Committee for Democratic Change announced the boycott of the congress.
Following the conference, a decision was made according to which the SNA was recognized as the “official representative” of the people of Syria in a dialogue with the authorities of the country. However, even with the adoption of this decision, representatives of the opposition have a number of differences. Earlier it was reported that the head of the Syrian National Council, Burkhan Galyun, called the statement of the UN Security Council, which calls for the implementation of Kofi Annan's proposals on resolving the Syrian crisis, worthy but not meeting the “true needs of the Syrian people” (source: Rosbalt, Dmitry Panovkin). Ahead of the SNA is still planned restructuring, refinement of the basic principles and provisions of the Council - in general, everything is to drag out time, waiting for help from the West or from the countries of the Sunni bloc.
The second meeting of the “Friends of Syria” is scheduled for April on 1 in Istanbul. Russia refused to participate in the meeting, just as it refused to participate in the first conference of "friends", which took place on February 24 in Tunisia. Syrian authorities are not invited to the forum. As A. Lukashevich rightly noted, “The participants are not looking for ways to establish an internal Syrian dialogue in the interest of a peaceful resolution of the conflict, but rather prepare the ground for outside intervention” (source: RBC).
This “preparation of the soil,” this hope of outside help, speaks not about the strength and consolidation of the “friends”, but about their weakness and disunity.
Third, the strategic initiative is in the hands of Assad, whose army day after day crowds the “revolutionaries”. As a result of antiterrorist operations, Homs, Hama, Idlib were “cleaned up”; there is a pursuit of militants on the periphery.
The oppositionists, who are not capable of a direct confrontation of the army, completely switched to the tactics of terror. The last act of the militants is the murder of the brigadier general of the Syrian air force Halef Abdullah. On March 28, four gangsters trapped him near the house in Aleppo and shot him.
On the eve of Homs, gunmen, according to media reports, fired at President Bashar Assad’s car. However, the official Syrian press did not comment on this information in any way and did not even cover it in any way.
And so that there was someone to fight, the Syrian revolutionaries recruit children into their ranks:
“According to the UN Special Representative for the Situation of Children in Armed Conflict Radhika Coomaraswamy, the United Nations“ received information incriminating the rebel Free Army of Syria of using minors as soldiers ”(source: "Komsomolskaya Pravda" in Ukraine "). If this is true, then a parallel arises with the last months of World War II, when adolescents were put up in Germany.
Finally, the Fourth, intervention in Syria for all those who wish to invade there will not be a “easy walk”. Here you and air defense, and the "forbidden chemical weapons", from the mere mention of which shakes Americans, and friendly Iran and a large army - 330.000 military personnel, many of whom have trained quite well over the past year.
Opinion of Yevgeny Satanovsky, President of the Institute of the Middle East: “... Syria is much more difficult for a NATO strike than Libya. She has a very good army, a serious air defense system, the soldiers have high morale and motivation. The army in Syria did not split as intended. The Alawite units in it will fight seriously and to the end, the Sunni units are more or less neutralized, they simply have no fuel, and they are not capable of a coup, even if this coup is paid by the same Qatari and Saudis (as they did in the army of Saddam and Gaddafi ). There is no fuel - and therefore, it is impossible to take Damascus. Asad left only parts that were absolutely true to him fully completed, and acted in this regard very competently ”(source: "Free Press", Andrei Polunin). However, NATO is not going to intervene in the conflict: “The North Atlantic Alliance has no plans for military intervention in Syria. This statement was made today (March 26. - O. Ch.) NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen ”(source: Rosbalt).
And Western peacemakers are worried about Hezbollah:
“However, everything becomes not so simple when you stop thinking about the actions of nation-states, and you start thinking about smaller, but more responsive and accurate military groups such as Hezbollah, which often defend their own specific interests. Both Syria and Iran are close financial and diplomatic supporters of the Lebanese Hezbollah group, and any threat to these two regimes Hezbollah can see as a threat to them too. Hezbollah did not hesitate to remind the international community of its ability to act outside Lebanon. And the international community, in turn, clearly showed that it understood the threat "(source: "InoSMI" - “Christian Scientific Monitor”, Scott Baldef).
Do not forget, speaking of the "fourth", and the interests of Russia. The clever Americans also guessed about them:
“Remember the time when the world was simple and the United States could simply make decisions unilaterally?” Russia also remembers this time - since the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 until about the middle of the Iraq war - and Moscow’s foreign policy over the past few weeks shows that Russia wants this time to end.
In Syria, Russia has been a firm and reliable supporter of the regime of President Bashar al-Assad, increasing its arms exports to Syria by about 600% over the past five years. In Syria there is the only foreign military base of Russia, in the Mediterranean city of Tartus. Then Russia became a key player, determining whether Syria agrees to come to the negotiating table and on what conditions. On Wednesday, Russia confirmed that it would support the attempt of the mediation mission by the UN special diplomatic representative in Syria Kofi Annan, if it does not include any bad conditions, such as forcing Asad to leave the position ”(source: "InoSMI" - “Christian Scientific Monitor”, Scott Baldef). And another quote: “Is it naive to take Russia's position on Syria and Iran at face value, that is, just for trying to convince the two regimes to seek peaceful solutions through dialogue? Maybe. But when states have spent time and money on forming alliances in a critical region, it is naive to assume that they will not take measures to protect these interests ”(same source).
Kofi Annan’s plan, the special representative of the UN and LAS, will not work either, - let Bashar Asad agree with him. Yu. B. Shcheglovin writes: “One can argue about ...“ the six points of the Russia-LAS settlement program, or about K. Annan’s initiatives, but the essence of the settlement lies in a number of mandatory conditions, to which neither Damascus nor the opposition are ready now. Everything else is normal diplomatic activity. First of all, it is a moratorium on any peaceful or non-peaceful protests with simultaneous conclusions of the main forces of the security forces from the cities. All other issues, such as the release of political prisoners or the creation of new political parties to participate in elections, should be the result of direct negotiations between authorized persons from the opposition and the president himself or his closest associates. This leads to two more conditions - the opposition’s refusal from the thesis of “unconditional withdrawal of Bashar al-Assad” and the formation of an authorized opposition body that would express the interests of all segments of the opposition. And with the first, and with the second problem ... "
At the recent talks between Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and Kofi Annan, the following was said:
“Maybe for Syria this is the last chance to avoid a protracted bloody civil war,” the president said. “Therefore, we will provide you with all possible assistance at any level, in various directions.” “We hope that we can once again rely on help and good advice from Russia,” the former UN Secretary General replied (source: Rossiyskaya Gazeta, Ekaterina Zabrodina).
About Kofi Annan's plan:
“The plan provides for: the development of an internal Syrian political solution that takes into account the aspirations and concerns of the Syrian people; stopping, under UN supervision, armed violence of any kind by all parties to the conflict to protect the population. In addition, all parties to the conflict must ensure access for humanitarian assistance to all areas of the armed conflict in the country and keep a daily two-hour humanitarian pause.
As for the duties of the Syrian authorities, they should release the detainees for participating in protest actions as soon as possible, ensure free movement of journalists around the country, and respect freedom of assembly and the right to peaceful demonstration ”(source: Rosbalt).
These points were adopted by the UN Security Council. However, the plan has no legal force. (By the way, the Arab League has developed a new package of decisions regarding Syria, which takes into account Annan’s points. If in January the League proposed to Assad transfer the powers to Deputy Faruk Al-Shara, now she is not going to demand the resignation of the current Syrian president).
Assad agreed with the points of Annan, but the rebels are not going to carry them out:
“The participants of the forum of Syrian opposition forces held in Istanbul agreed to continue the fight against the regime of Bashar Assad. As the representative of the Syrian National Council (SNS), George Sabra, said today at the end of the conference, “after the overthrow of the current leadership, a transitional government will be formed”, which will prepare the referendum.
“First of all, an agreement has been reached on a“ national pact ”. We agreed together to continue the struggle to regain our freedom and honor. Many thousands of our citizens have left their homes because of the violence and blood flowing in Syria. But they and those who demand reform continue to fight and resist, ”said Sabra. According to him, a commission has already been created, which will carry out preliminary work to form a transitional government and convene a referendum ”(source: ITAR-TASS, Kirill Zharov).
Therefore, Assad will continue to oppose the opposition, and Western countries will continue to accuse him of being undemocratic and violent, and compose various terrible stories. For example, such:
“UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay said that Syrian government forces are using children as targets. “Hundreds of children are detained and tortured. It's terrible, ”Pillay told the BBC.
“Children are shot in the legs, they are detained together with adults in inhuman conditions. Wounded children are denied medical care, they are being held either as hostages or as a source of information, "the ombudsman stressed" (source: Rosbalt).
There will be stories to write, but no one will decide on military intervention against Syria.
All that the West has done against Assad over the past week is to include his family in the EU’s “black list”. Bashar and Asma will not be able, for example, to visit the Summer Olympic Games in London and look at Syrian athletes.
So what will happen? What was before is an information war. The West will continue to add fuel to the fire, hoping to take Bashar Assad by hook or by crook — that is, not a hot war, which neither the United States nor NATO will take - but cold.
Ii. "We have already seen this movie"
В Washington Post from 29 in March posted an article-opinion of David Ignatius "The overthrow of the Syrian Assad by" soft landing.
The author believes that now is the time for the “Syrian revolutionaries” to get the answer “yes” from Bashar al-Assad and support the UN approach “instead of heading for civil war,” which brings death and destruction.
According to Ignatius, if both the Assad government, Russia and China approved Kofi Annan’s plan, then this proposal (even if the journalist has many weaknesses) will open the way to a “soft landing” - to overthrow Assad, “without destroying the stability country".
Ignatius admits that "moderate diplomatic decisions are for the average man." But then he writes that the Syrian opposition is waiting for the supply of weapons, the creation of a no-fly zone and other options for purely military solutions. “It is difficult from a moral point of view to understand the reasons for such opposition actions; the problem is that these military solutions will give far more innocent civilians killed and destroy the already delicate balance of the Syrian state. ”
The author continues: “We need to learn from recent Middle Eastern history and find a non-military solution in Syria — albeit with the inevitable ambiguity and the need to reach a compromise with unpleasant people. The peace agreement in Syria will also lead the main role of Russia and China, two countries that do not deserve a good press. Everyone will agree with me: Vladimir Putin will receive the front line telegraph tape if he mediates in the relatively peaceful care of Assad. ”
The journalist cites Iraq as a negative example, in which a military solution was implemented. “In this sense, the US invasion inadvertently and tragically sent Iraq back in time. Iraq received a portion of "democracy", but lost social cohesion. " "Democracy" is quoted by the author. - O. Ch.).
In general, the United States, according to the journalist, should learn lessons from history in Iraq - and not make the same mistakes in Syria. The author of the article is not a supporter of the opposition’s weapons: “We have already seen this movie. We know that this leads to a kind of lawlessness that is very hard to change. ” Therefore, Ignatius says: “I believe the Obama government ...” He believes that it is necessary to continue to seek support from Moscow — even after the “sluggishness of the Russians” that “Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (unwisely, but definitely) described as“ contemptible ”last month.
He further writes: “This is the moment for real politics: the West needs Russia's help in overthrowing Assad without a civil war, and Russia should mediate the transition to support its own future influence in the Arab world. This is the logic of pragmatics, and it lies at the heart of Annan’s peace efforts. ”
To reduce the possible bloodshed that is likely to occur after Assad’s departure - after all, political changes are unlikely to take place in Syria "without some bloodshed," the journalist believes that the "Friends of Syria" should think "about ways to prevent repression against Alawite and Christian communities who were loyal to the regime, ”at the very moment when Assad will be on board the aircraft flying to Doha or Moscow. “I hope,” Ignatius writes, “that Annan will appeal to the leaders of these minorities with an offer to them of the assurance that they will not be destroyed when Assad leaves.”
Thus, all questions on Ignatius, will decide in Syria Annan. The journalist does not even consider a different option, except for the resignation of Assad.
He further writes: “An alternative to a diplomatic soft landing is a war that will destroy an ethnic mosaic in Syria. It is easy to imagine the Sunni militia taking control of the central cities, such as Homs, Ham and Idlib, while parts of the Alawite retreat to the regions of Damascus and Latakia in the north. Assad can still claim the presidency in this scenario, but he will be a little more than the field commander (albeit with access to chemical weapons). This is a dark scenario in which Western air forces will have a limited effect. ”
In an article in Washington Post With reference to the Associated Press of March 29, entitled “The United States hopes that diplomacy will help end violence in Syria, and Clinton travels to the region with unanswered questions,” Syria is reported to be “stuck in a conflict between a violent government and armed rebels, - so that no country can be sure that it wants to support it. And it’s not clear what Annan can do to stop the bloodshed. ” The article cites the opinion of Victoria Nuland, who said that “the Assad regime is unable to fulfill the commitments made through Annan’s mediation on Tuesday, when Assad, among other conditions, agreed to a cease-fire. Since then, dozens of people have been killed by the forces of Assad. ”
"But Nuland said the United States supports international diplomatic efforts and declares that the government is still opposed to military intervention."
The article further notes that, unlike Libya, "the leader of which, Muammar Gaddafi, disgusted the world, Syria still has allies in Russia and Iran and a huge own army."
Also in the article it is reported that Hillary Clinton, after meeting with the Saudi king, will arrive in Istanbul at the “Meeting of Friends of Syria”, which will be presented to sixty countries.
As indicated in the article, on the question of what could be a success in this meeting, Nuland replied: "We want to see as much unity as possible among these opposition members." Humanitarian aid and further isolation of the Assad government are also mentioned. The agenda is similar to the one in February, voiced in Tunisia.
It is also noted that in the United States a growing number of legislators are in favor of American intervention. Mentioned is the “group of republican senators” and Senator Joe Lieberman, who on Wednesday condemned the atrocities of the Assad regime. Some senators (John McCain, Lindsay Graham) criticized Obama’s position. However, the government does not want to be involved in what is “essentially a civil war.”
The article concludes with the words of Hillary Clinton that the United States and its allies are going to help Sunni opposition members "improve their vision of a comprehensive democracy." It is supposed to convince "the minority, still supporting the government, that he will have a place in the post-Sadad future".
В "New York Times" 28 March: Lebanese report published by Anne Barnard: “Refugees say a neighbor shoots a neighbor in a Syrian offensive on democracy.”
The report says that, according to Sunni Muslims who fled Syria, government suppression of resistance organized by a religious minority that joined Assad is sectarian, and many Sunnis are convinced that they are campaigning to abandon their homes in certain areas country.
The evidence cites the words of refugees from the city of Al-Qusayr, who "believed that the government not only struck disobedient urban centers, but also towns and villages that were not seen as centers of an uprising."
We further read: “There are at least 6000 Syrian refugees living in the Bekaa Valley in eastern Lebanon, according to United Nations data, including several dozen women and children who were interviewed - here, on the northern edge of the valley. They said they felt threatened because they were Sunni, and some of them said they saw the military hand out rifles to residents of neighboring villages inhabited by Alawite members of the same unorthodox Muslim sect that Mr. Asad is their neighbors then opened fire on them. What they said is reinforced by messages from Syrian activists, received by telephone, and emails about the advancement of the sectarian line, and interviews with people in Syria.
The doctor from the city of Al-Qusayr, who did not name his name and who reposed Khalid bin al-Walid, an associate of the Prophet Muhammad, was asked if he was worried that the young Sunnis might decide to take revenge on the Alawite.
“No,” he said, walking through the darkening peach orchard. “Our religion teaches us to forgive.”
But another resident of Al-Qusayr, Abu Khalil, who was next to him, did not agree.
“Do we have to forgive until a single Sunni is alive?” He asked.
В Chicago Tribune March 29 published an article-opinion of Elizabeth Shekman Hurd "The Tragedy of Religious Freedom in Syria."
After introductory arguments on what religious freedom is, the journalist writes:
“Take the crisis in Syria. In certain circles, there is a fear that after the fall of the Assad regime, non-Muslim Syrians (and possibly non-Sunni Muslims) will suffer from a lack of religious freedom. USA Today reports that “Christians in Syria, where Muslims rebelled against President Bashar Assad, were subjected to murder, rape and kidnapping — in Damascus and rebel cities, according to Christian groups of human rights defenders.”
With the logic of this story told in the newspaper, everything is simple: "... the result of the overthrow of Assad will be Christian persecution." Therefore, Syria needs religious freedom.
And this is where the journalist sees an interesting problem.
"The problem is that the Syrian revolutionaries are not" Muslims who rose up against Assad. " This is a tale of the regime, not corresponding to reality on the streets of Syrian cities. For many decades, the Assad family relied on the perceived threat of sectarian anarchy hiding beneath the surface of society and politics to justify its autocratic rule. This is not a religious conflict between the Sunnis and the Alawite and Shiite allies in Iran and Lebanon. Presenting it as such strengthens the boundaries of religious differences and makes religious violence more likely. In this case, unfortunately, strong support in the name of protecting the freedom of the Christian faith legitimizes a strong and increasingly illegal regime. It adds fuel to the flames of religious and sectarian conflict, which, according to freedom of religion, it can overcome, because it has unique opportunities for this. ”
The journalist writes: “As in Tunisia, Libya and Egypt, the Syrian uprising is a grassroots, popular uprising against secular autocracy. People from all walks of life, including Alawites, are found among the protesters. This is not a struggle between Alawites and Christians. This is a struggle between the authoritarian regime, which divided the country's resources and suppressed its people, and those who oppose it. Syrian people on both sides are of different backgrounds. One of the most prominent Syrian dissentok, Fadva Suleiman, is a famous actress, an alawite. At the same time, many Alawites have someone in their families, working in the Assad security forces or other government bodies, and many fear dismissal, unemployment, and collective punishment ... ”
Elizabeth Shekman Hurd believes that the idea of a struggle between Sunni terrorists and the ruling regime is just as false as the idea of a struggle in Syria between Muslims and Christians. “That argument,” writes the journalist, “according to which freedom of religion is a decision for everyone, only misleading exhausted Syria.”
Observed and translated by Oleg Chuvakin
- especially for topwar.ru
- especially for topwar.ru