Dmitry Medvedev: Russia will support a tough but balanced resolution on Syria

Dmitry Medvedev: Russia will support a tough but balanced resolution on Syria Moscow, barely turning not the best in stories Our foreign policy page, related to the events in Libya, again faces a very difficult choice. Now the Syrian Arab Republic (SAR) is at stake. Moreover, if everything is not so simple with Libya, since Gaddafi was playing a tricky game, then Syria is a strategically important territory for us. You can not rent it in any case.


The Syrian opposition, inspired by the example of the Libyan “Vlasovites”, has become noticeably emboldened and is already demanding that Russia determine who it is with.

8 September The General Syrian Revolutionary Commission, which unites the opposition, made a request to send observers to the SAR, which should, in their opinion, stop the repression of the Syrian authorities against the population. The opposition asked the UN to establish a human rights mission on the territory of the Syrian state, and also demanded access to foreign media in the SAR. In case of Damascus’s refusal to cooperate with the UN, the revolutionary commission proposed to establish more stringent measures, including the establishment of a no-fly zone over the country, following the example of Libya, Reuters reported.

Given the fact that it is impossible to establish a no-fly zone without the suppression of the Syrian air force and air defense, the Syrian “Vlasovites” actually proposed to the “world community” to start a war with ATS. And this is a fact of betrayal of their homeland, which at all times punished in the most severe way. That is, the Libyan opposition has officially admitted that they are traitors to their country, ready to call on any external force to overthrow the legitimate authority. Gaddafi rightly called such people “rats,” otherwise you wouldn’t call them.

On the same day, representatives of the Syrian opposition visited the capital of Russia, they met with the chairman of the committee of the Federation Council on international affairs, Mikhail Margelov. Opponents of the Syrian regime asked to send international observers to the SAR to help stop the violence in the country.

Then Moscow was visited by the adviser on political and informational issues of Syrian President Butain Shaaban. Counselor Bashar al-Assad denied the earlier report by UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay about 2600 killed in Syria during clashes between the opposition and government officials. As Shaaban reported during a conversation with members of the Federation Council of Russia, approximately 700 people were killed on each side. In addition, according to the counselor, official Damascus is ready to provide a list of names of those killed. According to Shaaban, quoted by Interfax, the Russian Federation is in favor of a peaceful settlement of the conflict in Syria, and Damascus welcomes the future visit of the delegation of the Federation Council to the Middle East region.

Is Moscow renting Syria?

The Russian Federation will support the resolution of the UN Security Council on the SAR if the document is addressed to both sides of the internecine conflict and if the resolution does not entail the automatic application of sanctions, said Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.

Medvedev said that the Syrian theme was one of the main topics at his meeting with British Prime Minister David Cameron on Monday. In addition, he said that the differences in this matter between the Russian Federation and the Western countries are not fully resolved.

According to him, the difference is not “dramatic”, but it still exists. Russia proceeds from the fact that on the SAR it is necessary to adopt such a UN resolution that will be tough, but at the same time balanced and directed to two parts of the country, to two sides of the Syrian conflict - both the legitimate authorities headed by President Bashar Assad and the opposition - said the Russian president after the meeting. “Only in this case can this resolution have the right to success,” he specified.

New sanctions are currently not needed, as already now a large number of economic sanctions are in force with respect to the SAR, which are imposed by both the EU and the US. “Additional pressure is absolutely not required now,” said Dmitry Medvedev.

The Russian president noted that he considers it important not to allow the “Libyan scenario” in the Syrian state, where the UN Security Council resolution actually led to foreign military intervention in Libyan affairs. He said that it is around this issue that the discussion between the Russian Federation and the West is currently taking place. And he expressed the hope that at the end of this discussion a “mutually acceptable version of the resolution” will be found.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

31 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. KuigoroZHIK 13 September 2011 09: 19 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    I wonder how Medvedev will react if (when) he is confronted with the fact of a repeat of the Libyan scenario ....
  2. Matroskin 13 September 2011 09: 54 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    No way. By then, he will move to a "village house" somewhere in the west.
  3. Varnaga 13 September 2011 11: 21 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    I absolutely support the position of the Foreign Ministry on Libya and Syria. There are a lot of “strategists” very roughly discussing some kind of lost money for Russia in connection with the termination of contracts, etc., without even having a close real vision of what is happening and, moreover, not knowing the strategic priorities of the state. I see the situation as follows: “surrendering” to the West the Greater Middle East (the ability to influence events in the region in the face of US opposition, without having the fundamental foundation laid down over the course of a decade is very, very controversial) and realizing that heating this macro-region is one of its goals puts a blow to Russia, the Kremlin allows (probably bargaining some dividends for itself) the West to get bogged down there, depleting its resources (recall the problems of NATO countries with high-precision weapons) and thereby taking a strategic pause, which I think no one will argue, is necessary to our state.
    Please minus, gentlemen.
    1. dmb
      dmb 13 September 2011 12: 04 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Maybe so, only with the unification of Germany and the expansion of NATO have already bargained. The results are deplorable. But already if traded. then at least they didn’t carry nonsense publicly. And not so long ago, our “leader” announced to the whole world that he would tear a vest on his belly for Syria.
    2. spok
      spok 13 September 2011 12: 16 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      our state pause to one place
      Medvedev surrenders to Syria! how to surrender Libya.
      traitors in power who destroy that little that remains of the RUSSIAN army
    3. solodova 13 September 2011 13: 15 New
      • 10
      • 0
      +10
      Recall the words of the German priest Martin Nimoller: “When the Nazis came to take the Communists, I was silent, because I was not a Communist. When the Nazis began to take the Catholics, I was silent, because I was not a Catholic. When the Nazis took the Jews, I was silent, because I was not a Jew. And when the Nazis came for me, there was no one to speak up in my defense. ”
      1. Ivan35
        Ivan35 13 September 2011 14: 06 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Unfortunately, Solodov, this is happening now - they are attacking one country after another - and future victims are silently watching. We all repeated many times that there is no longer a country that "restrained" them - our homeland - the USSR

        And Russia is not capable of a "tough" position (even if the Communists had come to power now) because of its smallness and, besides, it is under their "yoke"

        I still hope that our "oligarchic" government will still act in the interests of the country and will do everything to "bargain" for Syria and Iran
        (and they will find workarounds to supply defense equipment and technology to these countries)
        1. solodova 13 September 2011 16: 19 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          It seems that Syria is already being surrendered, and Gaddafi is waging his little war alone.
          We would now need people to take care of Russia, the government, our potential is powerful, only it will be sold cleanly, the same "oligarchic government". With our natural resources, our human forces, to be in such ... opera, this is HOW you should have tried. And one EBN could not have done it. There will be “our” government for us, all laws against the people, all ministers, THESE will not help us in any way.
          Give Chubauz nanotechnology ... Castrate the magnificent educational system, inherited from the USSR under the standards of ignorance ... Almost destroy the most powerful army, since no external enemies could ... And you still hope for something?
          No, Ivan35, If you make a list of "What needs to be done to destroy Russia," then almost every item will have a checkmark "done."
          One could understand this crisis if there was a civil or external war, but stumble from scratch ...
          And about to be ripped off or imprisoned - it depends on how quickly they surrender us. And that’s how Gorbi’s prize will be given.
          1. AleksUkr 13 September 2011 18: 22 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            And our education is introduced according to the Bologna system. Colon - can you tell me what kind of animal? and now education in Russia ...
      2. AleksUkr 13 September 2011 18: 20 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        The ostrich's position on the pavement has not yet brought anyone relief. We are clearly losing our former, if not friends, then in any case not enemies.
        1. oper66
          oper66 14 September 2011 05: 42 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          so Libya was not a friend and didn’t lie to us, and so the gringos crushed their ate and drank, they all felt that the Iraqi Yugoslavs were so sick and when they threw us and went to bed, I forgot that I think our country needs to be confronted with their mischief only advisers should not harness for those who then betray remember 1914 as our people imposed 1 world Saxons aside and our great-grandfathers in the trenches and revolutionaries brought us to me it seems they are specialists who beat us for whom we can foolishly harness ourselves and give an occasion to strike at us as if the enemy shouldn’t die in a foreign land, we need to defend our own who said thanks to the Bulgarians for the Ottoman yoke or the Poles and Czechs for the German occupation, but if you turn up against us then beat the NATO
    4. Ivan35
      Ivan35 13 September 2011 13: 56 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      No, Varnaga, although I am on the side of the communists and also criticize the government of the oligarchs - but I will support your comment here - I am not a supporter of "complete denigration" and "rocking the boat"

      I also hope that more professional people than us sit in the Foreign Ministry.
      Although I don’t have any illusions about the "power of the oligarchs" in Russia (of course, the interests of the oligarchs are their goal) - but it seems to me that in recent years they have realized that they still need this country - that they are not expected in the West - but that they will be "ripped off" and imprisoned - and I see that they are still taking some measures to strengthen the country - and even unite the 3 republics to increase power

      I really hope that they bargain for Syria (and Iran) - so I have a “unprofessional” but strong feeling that we’re next in line
    5. mitrich
      mitrich 14 September 2011 12: 46 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Everything is correct VARNAGA wrote. Weighted and understanding the situation. And I suggest that possible minusers at least sometimes put themselves in the place of the leaders of the Russian state, and not rush to extremes and wage virtual wars with the entire Western world. And even more so, the greatest stupidity of the Russian Federation was to run into its "hot" conflict with NATO in its current state over Libya itself. China here for this, whose interests in Libya are many times greater than Russian, "for some reason" did not dare. Although it is clear why - because it’s not crazy fools who are sitting in Beijing ...
      Incidentally, the Syrian opposition held yesterday "Day of Wrath", directed exclusively against Russia. This means that the position taken by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is correct in Syria, since it is so sharply perceived by Syrian Protestants ...
      1. Marat
        Marat 15 September 2011 21: 38 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        On this issue, I agree with Varnaga, Ivan35 and Mitrich. It seems to me that the government and diplomats are trying "as they can" to resist pendosy and cover Syria

        It’s not necessary to completely “denigrate” them - let them work - let there be at least some sense from them other than plunder by the oligarchs of the public domain

        But all the same, it is necessary to bring the Communist Party to power or strengthen its position - then we will still be calmer that they will not sell us behind our backs and the very fact that the oligarchs are in "power" is unacceptable to me (and I am sure by many)

        And now Russia is not able to enter into direct confrontation - it is forced to maneuver - because it is not the USSR. Here's another reason to unite - to revive at least part of the empire
  4. Crazyzy
    Crazyzy 13 September 2011 12: 31 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    For any West will push the resolution on Syria through the UN Security Council. Moreover, the simpler its scenario, the better for him.
    Our leadership, which assured that after Libya it would not even read the resolution prepared by the West on Syria, now, it turns out, is almost ready to consider and support it.
    We have already lost one of our ally in the person of Libya. And now we can quite easily lose Syria, in fact, our last ally in the region. The fate of the resolution on Syria is completely dependent on Russia.
    1. AleksUkr 13 September 2011 18: 25 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      But who will ask us. Thank you for saying that at least they will inform us that they decided. And ours will agree. We will play according to their laws, until the end of the election, and there we will see.
    2. mitrich
      mitrich 14 September 2011 14: 20 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Crazyzy,
      and Libya and Gaddafi, it turns out, an ALLY of Russia? Libyan Arabs fought as volunteers in the ranks of the Russian army in Chechnya, Libya recognized South Ossetia and Abkhazia, Libya leased its ports and airfields to us, Libya provided all possible support to Russia when voting in various international organizations ?????
      In 2007 or 2008, during Gaddafi’s visit to Moscow, he indicated his interest in a number of economic projects in Libya and the supply of Russian weapons. And what came of this to the stage of signing SPECIFIC agreements, except for the railway line?
      Do not be like talkers, colleague. There are so many of them. In the ranking, maybe add, only you will be read already unnecessarily ...
      1. Insurgent
        Insurgent 14 September 2011 20: 04 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        They asked Milosovich, it’s like Syria then Belalus Russia will sit out, but what about the port of Tartus for Russian carls so in a couple of years and across Russia the resolution will be adopted by the UN
      2. Crazyzy
        Crazyzy 15 September 2011 09: 38 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        mitrich does not have to exaggerate a colleague !!!
        The CSTO member states (Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan) are our allies ???
        Perhaps the soldiers of these countries fought as volunteers in the ranks of the RF Armed Forces in Chechnya?
        Which of them even supported Russia during the war in Chechnya?
        Which of these countries really supported Russia during the war in South Ossetia? (A declaration was adopted at the CSTO summit expressing deep concern over the attempt made by Georgia to solve the conflict in South Ossetia by force. The leaders of the CSTO member states called for lasting security of South Ossetia and Abkhazia).
        Which of them recognized the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia? Maybe Belarus and Armenia? (Whose Foreign Ministry did not recommend its citizens to visit Georgia through the territories of these states).
        I do not argue about military bases (Armenia, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan).
        Which of the CSTO countries supports Russia in various international organizations ???
        With which country do we have real contracts for the supply of arms worth billions of dollars? (All of them only want something from Russia for free or at low prices).
        Which of them will really support the Russian Federation in the conflict with NATO (God forbid) ???
        Only if Belarus. She will have to do this since the main blow will be delivered through her territory. (The shortest way to Moscow). Kazakhstan ???
        As Alexander II said: "Russia has only two allies - the army and navy." And only during the twentieth century the correctness of these words was repeatedly confirmed.
  5. hellbringer
    hellbringer 13 September 2011 12: 46 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    If I’m not mistaken, Syria is just such a base, well, or was it, I don’t know how things are now. And yes they are - the Foreign Ministry and the top are bargaining for everything, soon you and I will be bargaining for what the slaves will go for, in the sense of the citizens of the Russian Federation. You just need not bargain, but work and do your job well. But it’s easy to talk, I watched it yesterday as my little daughter haggled with friends in a toy hairdresser. Is this the level of our Foreign Ministry?
    They will surrender the macro-region completely and allow it either to fall under the influence of the United States completely or the caliphate, who, remembering the history of their creation, will certainly be an ally of the same USA, so what is the Foreign Ministry trading about? Where is the benefit in the end?

    Imagine 1941. - The Germans are a rod and Stalin is going to bargain in Berlin, because after all, we stomped in many ways at the beginning of the war. Not funny?
    1. Banshee 13 September 2011 23: 31 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Yes, the fact of the matter is that it is not funny. In the presence of pressure instruments (if not on the USA, at least on Europe), it is unprofitable to pursue such a policy, to put it mildly. Prostitutes in politics (and in life) were loved only when ... well, you know. When the need was.
      I would not want to live in a country that is treated as a huge and strong curve.
      I will allow myself a free quote from A. Sapkovsky

      - and we were told that this war is the biggest of all wars, and it will put an end to all wars on earth ...
      - son, you see that lady? She, kurva, big. I would even say awesome. But, with all the desire, she will not be able to perekurvit all other cool in the world ...

      I'm talking about what? Or in the general system, or in battle. But one is not a warrior in the field ...
  6. zczczc
    zczczc 13 September 2011 17: 45 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Russia is trying to sit on two chairs. How does it end - everyone knows.
    1. oper66
      oper66 14 September 2011 05: 54 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      not on two but on his own and not giving anyone a reason to sit down or even drive off the chair there is no need to harness oneself for those who do not remember the good thing they all got drunk blew krill that in the Soviet Union they have something to say, let them try sweet with the Saxons and it’s not the first time the old owners decided to return for a blanket and
  7. KuigoroZHIK 13 September 2011 19: 28 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    I absolutely support the position of the Foreign Ministry on Libya and Syria. There are a lot of “strategists” very roughly discussing some kind of lost money for Russia in connection with the termination of contracts, etc., without even having a close real vision of what is happening and, moreover, not knowing the strategic priorities of the state. I see the situation as follows: “surrendering” to the West the Greater Middle East (the ability to influence events in the region in the face of US opposition, without having the fundamental foundation laid down over the course of a decade is very, very controversial) and realizing that heating this macro-region is one of its goals puts a blow to Russia, the Kremlin allows (probably bargaining some dividends for itself) the West to get bogged down there, depleting its resources (recall the problems of NATO countries with high-precision weapons) and thereby taking a strategic pause, which I think no one will argue, is necessary to our state.
    Please minus, gentlemen.


    Such a pause is VERY necessary for our STATE, but not for the current government (no matter how long the pause is, they will all sound profane).

    ps I am very disappointed with the older generation, which allowed rulers like the current ones to come to power and ruin a great power. And, frankly, I'm scared for our people (Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians ....). After all, if we are silent now, we won’t have to wait for anything good.
    For something to change for the better - you need to make it clear to the government that the people are on the verge of ....
  8. Varnaga 13 September 2011 19: 49 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    ok, and what was in August 2008? I ask purely out of sports interest.
    1. oper66
      oper66 14 September 2011 05: 47 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      help to those who were slaughtering Russians in the Czech Republic against us and Wahhabis, and even now the Abkhazians are looking at the West as they will be given the go-ahead and they will all leave and freebies are good until there are no freebies
    2. Insurgent
      Insurgent 14 September 2011 21: 33 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      It is still unknown how the Tsar liberated Bulgaria from the Turks with these republics that were not recognized by Bulgaria, and that Bulgaria fought against Russia in the first world war, and the same thing in the second, but it seems that they write to us in the Bulgarian sleeps and the Turks lived well
  9. KuigoroZHIK 13 September 2011 21: 09 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    ok, and what was in August 2008? I ask purely out of sports interest.

    Google - request "August 2008" - the first link will give a detailed (albeit not very) answer. For a full assessment, of course, it’s not enough, but sports interest will satisfy completely.
  10. Ruslank
    Ruslank 14 September 2011 05: 20 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    It’s always strange to read all this. Our people - * Soviet * - were sick and outstripped for the fraternal international Arab world. We are all in pain for Libya, Iraq, Iran, etc. But what didn’t we better think about for these Arabs? the oligarchs had where to sell weapons so that the same Assad could keep his people in check later his son’s grandson, etc. And we will help them so that the monarchy don’t fall Gd ... Didn’t we better take our oligarch monarchs by the balls ?? We are all angry with the West and Pindos, why? We envy them rot them their people don’t starve there is social support the old people don’t climb in the trash and we ourselves save a little dough we all dream in the west to rot Maleh or NO?
    1. Banshee 14 September 2011 07: 15 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Or not. Do not mix domestic policy and foreign. What we have inside is one thing. What is outside is different. All of this is not the same ministry, right?

      Therefore, having lowered (so far) internal problems, I will say that I have little idea how you can arrange an isolation regime, and why?
      There is safety in numbers. Therefore, in the modern world, living without allies is somehow uncomfortable. Narrowing and focusing on solving internal problems is the best gift for those who want “good” for us.

      The point is not even in the hypothetical support of Russia's foreign policy by other countries. Although in it too. Remember how the hysteria in 2008 subsided when Abkhazia and Ossetia began to recognize other countries? And if we were in proud loneliness? It would have shouted all about Russian aggression. Make the view "And we do not care!"? It's complicated now. I hope so far.

      So you should not fight, you should not close up, you need to be friends (to be friends, not to grovel), and to have allies, who will vote in the Security Council, and in the UN, if they throw a veto, too, and they will give them a base.
      1. dmb
        dmb 14 September 2011 12: 06 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Do not tell me, to those of those that in the Security Council have the right to "veto" can throw us land under the base? And who is our right now interested in. Example-Serbia.
  11. PSih2097 14 September 2011 14: 37 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The Americans clearly answered why they needed Libya and Syria to kick us and the Chinese out of the region ...
    1. Insurgent
      Insurgent 14 September 2011 21: 35 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      You can not intervene in the conflict at least in the UN to support Syria
  12. Fray
    Fray 19 September 2011 20: 30 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    “Additional pressure is now absolutely not required,” said Dmitry Medvedev.
    The concealment of David Aaronovich Mendel’s Jewish origin (“Dmitry Anatolyevich Medvedev”) by the Russian Chekist media is a gross manifestation of the most terrible, frenzied state anti-Semitism, as if there was something shameful in Jews that needed to be hidden.
    am