Military Review

Unanimously!

35
Last Friday, the UN Security Council voted for a resolution on Syria. The document was adopted unanimously. It provides for the drafting of a new constitution and contains a roadmap for resolving the situation. The leading role in the organization of the negotiation process is assigned to the UN. The resolution also provides for the holding of presidential elections in Syria, to be held within eighteen months from the beginning of work on the drafting of the constitution.




The text was prepared by an international group headed by two co-chairs - Russia and the United States.

This resolution was the first and so far the only document on Syria for the entire period of the civil war, which the negotiators were able to agree on in the UN Security Council.

In accordance with the adopted document, a transitional government will be formed in Syria over the next six months. According to the plan of the UN Security Council, it should represent "all parts of society." The organization of the negotiations rests with the United Nations.

Elections in Syria in accordance with international standards and under the supervision of the UN must pass within eighteen months. All this time, the international group in support of Syria will continue to conduct its work on a cease-fire and finding ways of a political settlement in the country.

"Vedomosti" provide an assessment of the new resolution by leading world politicians.

According to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, the resolution should be considered "success."

The adopted document establishes the right of the Syrian people to determine the future of the country, said Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.

US Secretary of State John Kerry believes that a cease-fire in Syria may be announced as early as January 2016.

The publication recalls that the draft resolution John Kerry brought to Moscow 15 December. President Putin generally supported him, calling him "acceptable." Putin himself said this at a December 17 press conference. According to him, the resolution should arrange and the Syrian authorities.

Already identified and those who are not satisfied with the document. This is not Assad, but the so-called Syrian opposition. As they write “Vedomosti”, its representatives criticized the adopted text. In their opinion, the resolution undermines the outcome of the negotiations of opposition representatives in Riyadh and reduces the value of previous UN resolutions to resolve the conflict. So tweeted the head of the West-backed National Coalition of Syrian Opposition and Revolutionary Forces, Khaled al-Hoxha.

Several opinions of politicians leads "First channel".

“Syria must remain a single secular multi-religious political state, comfortable and safe for all groups of the population, and only the Syrian people themselves have the right to determine their future,” the “First” quotes Sergey Lavrov.

“The agreement reached gives the Syrian people a real choice not between Assad and ISIL, but between war and peace. When I was in Moscow, President Putin confirmed that Assad was ready to participate in the political process, ready to cooperate on the formation of a constitution, to prepare elections, ”said Kerry.

“You know the name of the film“ Mission Impossible ”. So, the mission becomes potentially feasible thanks to what we saw today. Unanimous support in the UN Security Council confirms this. The process will be difficult, but hope has emerged, ”said UN Secretary General Representative Staffano Mistura.

RBC notes that the resolution does not have an exact date for commencing work on the constitution and not mentioning whether Assad can run for election.

In the West, they still consider Assad a war criminal responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of people, and Moscow and Tehran see him as a key regional ally. On the other hand, over the past few months, in view of the struggle with the "IG", the positions of the parties are converging. Not without reason, at a meeting with Sergei Lavrov, the US Secretary of State said that the United States and its partners "are not looking for a regime change in Syria." And yet, ultimately, Washington does not want to see Assad in power in Syria.

“The Secretary of State clearly spoke when he said that Assad does not have the opportunity to lead the future Syria. He noted that no one should forcibly choose between a dictator and terrorists, adding that the challenge remains to us how to create such conditions so that an alternative appears to this, ”representative of the US Embassy William Stevens told RBC.

It is difficult to say what Russia thinks about this, let us add. We already brought on "IN" one Reuters publication. Sources of the agency in diplomatic circles claim that the Russians “made it clear”: they are ready to agree to Bashar al-Assad’s resignation from the post of Syrian president. At least, this “readiness” of the Kremlin is confirmed in “private conversations”. Some Western officials believe that there is a possibility of a similar compromise between the West and Moscow.

At the end of the “compromise”, Assad is leaving, said a high-ranking Western diplomat, who spoke to journalists on condition of anonymity. According to him, “in private conversation,” the Russians accepted the point of view that Assad would resign at the end of the transition. True, Moscow is not yet ready to make a corresponding statement publicly, he explained.

In any case, let us add on our own, one can only guess at this topic.

Some world analysts believe that the resolution shows: Moscow was right regarding Syria.

"InoTV" cites the opinion of the Algerian newspaper "L'Expression". According to the publication, the approved resolution on Syria shows: Putin was not mistaken in his policy, eventually forcing the world to reckon with Russia. True, Saudi Arabia and Turkey are still interested in continuing the war in the Middle East.

The adopted resolution shows that Russia was right. Putin won an international contest. "You can not change the model of life on the planet without the consent of Moscow, which put an end to the unipolar world," writes the publication.

Iran has the right to rejoice. After twelve years of economic sanctions, Tehran returns to the international arena.

But Saudi Arabia document "lost nose". Another “side victim” of the resolution is Turkey. Russia has proved how the Turkish authorities are helping the IG militants to sell oil, the newspaper said.

There are also the opinions of Russian experts on the resolution adopted by the UN Security Council.

As the vice-speaker of the State Duma, a member of the Duma committee on international affairs, Nikolai Levichev, noted, the adopted resolution was a great success for Russian politics. The approved document lays a solid international legal foundation for a Syrian settlement and creates the prerequisites for the formation of a broad antiterrorist coalition.

“The resolution of the UN Security Council on Syria is a great success of the Russian policy, the cumulative result of the efforts of our president, diplomats, the military, and all those who are today involved in solving this acute international crisis. The resolution creates a solid international legal foundation for the Syrian settlement process, ”Mr. Levichev said RIA News".

According to the deputy, the adoption of the document was an important milestone in a civilized solution to the conflict after the Vienna agreements and the solution of the problem of chemical weapons in Syria. According to Levichev, the resolution is an important step towards the "formation of a unified and broad anti-terrorist coalition."

The expert believes that the resolution is also an unconditional victory of the Russian approach: “It’s about the unconditional victory of the Russian approach, at the head of which is the leading role of the UN in world affairs as the cornerstone of the modern international security system, the inadmissibility of interference in the affairs of other states, including to change governments, the sovereign right of the Syrian people to determine their own destiny, the inadmissibility of double standards in the fight against international terrorism, attempts to divide terrorism Comrade on the "bad" and "good."

Thus, we add in conclusion, for the first time during the civil war, a collective international document on Syria was born, which was fully agreed upon in the UN Security Council. The unanimous "yes" says a lot.

As for the fate of Assad, the adopted resolution, which does not clarify other details, does not establish its direct “departure.” Obviously, this issue will be discussed more than once at the highest level.

It can be said that this time the American version under the motto “Assad must leave” did not go to the UN. And this is the merit of Russia.

Observed and commented on Oleg Chuvakin
- especially for topwar.ru
35 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. izya top
    izya top 22 December 2015 06: 12 New
    +3
    We can say that this time the American version under the motto “Assad must leave” did not go to the UN.
    yes the Yankees change their shoes on the go. so more than once they will voice their mantra
    1. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 22 December 2015 06: 47 New
      +5
      US Secretary of State John Kerry believes that a ceasefire in Syria may be announced in January 2016
      Dreamer Kerry! the war begins easily, but it can never end, flowing smoothly into partisan, terrorist, cold and others ... that you can’t see examples from the latter, where prosperity has come? Libya? Iraq? Where?
      1. Shveps
        Shveps 22 December 2015 08: 28 New
        +6
        Khasavyurt, Minsk 33 and Putin's cunning plan in one bottle.
        Poor Assad!
        1. jjj
          jjj 22 December 2015 13: 36 New
          +2
          The Minsk agreements spelled out Ukraine’s obligations, but Russia is being punished for their failure to comply. And this document will be interpreted necessarily to the detriment of Russia
  2. alex-cn
    alex-cn 22 December 2015 06: 18 New
    10
    In my opinion, this resolution will remain the same as everyone else. A knot in the Middle East should not be cut, but it must be untangled. With 18 gangs for XNUMX months you can’t cope, and changing horses at the crossing is fraught with .... This, of course, is a personal opinion.
    1. Very old
      Very old 22 December 2015 06: 40 New
      +8
      Quote: alex-cn
      In my opinion, this resolution will remain the same as everyone else. A knot in the Middle East should not be cut, but it must be untangled. With 18 gangs for XNUMX months you can’t cope, and changing horses at the crossing is fraught with .... This, of course, is a personal opinion.


      And not only yours
      There are many examples: Palestine with Israel and other neighbors, Ulster, Karabakh, a tangle of Spanish and Belgian problems, Canada on the list ...
      18 meters A quick fairy tale affects
    2. Nikolay K
      Nikolay K 22 December 2015 08: 27 New
      +1
      If the states and Saudis with Turkey cease financing these gangs, then everything is quite real. Apparently this is the basis of the compromise between Laurel and Carrie: Assad against foreign support. Therefore, the Syrian leader flew urgently to Iran, agree with him all the agreements and receive guarantees of personal security. It’s just that our people in Ukraine also believed in Yanukovych’s peace accords, but that’s how it turned out. . . I can’t even imagine what guarantees were stipulated this time.
  3. parusnik
    parusnik 22 December 2015 06: 35 New
    +3
    The main thing is that the American version, under the slogan “Assad must leave”, did not go to the UN ... What actually was required ... and see how the resolution will be implemented .. As for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, how many resolutions have been adopted .. but to the point ..
  4. Alexander 3
    Alexander 3 22 December 2015 06: 41 New
    +2
    I would like to believe that the igil will end in 18 months, but it seems to me from the realm of fantasy. The mattresses will continue to bomb the water pipes, hospitals, and the positions of Assad’s troops.
  5. Great-grandfather of Zeus
    Great-grandfather of Zeus 22 December 2015 06: 47 New
    +1
    Now "sworn friends" will be involved, and all agreements and plans can be thrown into the trash.
  6. sa-ag
    sa-ag 22 December 2015 06: 51 New
    +1
    Well, Assad can be "left" in various ways, for example, according to the new Constitution, Syria can be a parliamentary republic and the president is there for signage, number two - such a compromise figure as Asma (if not mistaken) Assad, she seems to be from a Sunni family, becomes president may matter
  7. Aleksandr72
    Aleksandr72 22 December 2015 06: 52 New
    +2
    “Syria must remain a single secular multi-religious political state, comfortable and safe for all groups of the population, and only the Syrian people themselves have the right to determine their future,” the “First” quotes Sergey Lavrov.
    - This is the only possible acceptable way for the Syrian people to develop the country. But this definitely will not suit both the radical Islamists behind whom the Saudis and Washington stand, and the numerous Syrian opposition, including the so-called moderate (someone else would explain how they differ from immoderate?) Do not forget about Turkey, which has always had and has its own interests in Syria (especially given the fact that the current president of Turkey does not see the coast at all).
    Therefore, whatever one may say, the UN Security Council resolution on Syria will most likely not work. In the best case, we get a long-term sluggish (at times sharply aggravated) conflict of the type of Arab-Jewish.
    I have the honor.
  8. iliitchitch
    iliitchitch 22 December 2015 06: 55 New
    +3
    I can imagine what “consent” will be in that government. "Dialogue" will begin the most constructive. Assad is banging, and all matters are - the mattress has reached its goal, the mess in Syria will continue, that’s the whole resolution.
    1. 34 region
      34 region 22 December 2015 07: 30 New
      +4
      Why imagine? Just look at Iraq and Libya. According to the version of the West, there were dictators who strangled the people. The dictators were removed. AND? Is life getting better?
  9. olimpiada15
    olimpiada15 22 December 2015 07: 00 New
    +2
    I would like to hear about the imposition of sanctions against Turkey for supporting the Islamic State in the form of oil trade.
    1. -Traveller-
      -Traveller- 22 December 2015 13: 44 New
      0
      Not caught, not a thief.
      all our neighbors neighing, the Kurds said that it was their oil. so on
    2. The comment was deleted.
  10. Corsair0304
    Corsair0304 22 December 2015 07: 18 New
    +2
    The fact that such a resolution has been adopted at the UN level is in itself a huge achievement. 18 months ceasefire? I think that all the participants in the negotiation process understand that this period is designated “two bast shoes to the right of the sun” and, by the way, can swing both in one direction and the other. It all depends on whether the states will continue to protect Erdogan and continue to supply ISIS by dropping parachute weapons and ammunition.
    The main thing that Russia managed to achieve was a transfer from a purely military aspect to the political plane with the hope that there would be no reprisal like Saddam or Gaddafi.
    1. 34 region
      34 region 22 December 2015 07: 35 New
      +4
      And why do not they protect Erdogan and ISIS? Do you think there is no benefit from chaos? Is it bad that your street neighbors were beaten and became homeless? But now they can buy different sweets for cheap. And they will work and fight for soldering and a dose of drugs. No wonder plantations were cultivated in Afghanistan. And non-government income and doses to the militants. And the disposal of excess population. One pluses!
  11. aszzz888
    aszzz888 22 December 2015 07: 47 New
    +2
    As conceived by the UN Security Council, it should represent “all parts of society”


    Including terrorists DAISH?
  12. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 22 December 2015 08: 01 New
    +1
    The adopted document secures the right of the Syrian people to determine the future of the country

    And this is one of the main provisions for which Russia fought. It just seems to me that this provision, fixed on paper, will subsequently be torpedoed by the United States through the so-called the opposition.
  13. Vladimir 1964
    Vladimir 1964 22 December 2015 08: 36 New
    +1
    It can be said that this time the American version under the motto “Assad must leave” did not go to the UN. And this is the merit of Russia.


    And I liked this phrase in the epilogue of Oleg Chuvakin, perhaps I would have considered it the “key” phrase of the article. For no matter how events develop in the future, there is still a definite outcome. Russia really has achieved a turning point in the Middle East. It is clear that further events are difficult to predict, but this fact already takes place, and it is already impossible to disregard our country in world politics.
    Something like that, colleagues. hi
  14. Gormenghast
    Gormenghast 22 December 2015 09: 07 New
    +1
    I hope that no terrorists will be the ones "parts of society"who will participate in the settlement.

    Why are all zapadentsy so ganged on Assad?

    I will ask a question provocative for amers: why is Putin worse than the aggressor Bush (and Obama as well)? Why Bush and Obama, who bombed and aggressed so many countries, are US presidents; and Putin - a tyrant, just like Darth Vader?
  15. Belousov
    Belousov 22 December 2015 09: 30 New
    +5
    Alas, this is not a victory. Victory would be if they left Assad. And so - it just backtracked. Will the new constitution be like in Libya? It’s like a “national council” without a clear leader (so as not to be tempted to get real power, as well as be pulled by different strings in the new government) and as a result, a fragmented country where American corporations hold oil fields, and the rest can be fought for crumbs from the lordly table ?
    1. Ural resident
      Ural resident 22 December 2015 10: 17 New
      0
      I agree. As it is, our central media are in no hurry to score their broadcasts about this “victory”.
      Rather, a compromise and concession on our part. Now this resolution will hide behind and again blame Assad that he violates the peace and the UN decision.
  16. afrikanez
    afrikanez 22 December 2015 10: 04 New
    +1
    US Secretary of State John Kerry believes that a ceasefire in Syria may be announced in January 2016
    Is it that Kerry himself will negotiate with the ISIS? fool
  17. Karabin
    Karabin 22 December 2015 11: 02 New
    0
    The document was adopted unanimously. It provides for the development of a new constitution and contains a roadmap for resolving the situation. The leading role in organizing the negotiation process is assigned to the UN. The resolution also provides for the holding of presidential elections in Syria,

    It smells of Minsk and chitroplanom. Pack your bags and get ready. In the meantime
    this issue will be discussed more than once at the highest level.
  18. Volzhanin
    Volzhanin 22 December 2015 11: 13 New
    0
    We don’t want to write a normal Constitution for ourselves - we all use the one written by the enemy-merikos, but still there ...
    The Syrians, I think, will cope with this matter no worse than us, and even more so the lying Yankees.
  19. tacet
    tacet 22 December 2015 11: 25 New
    0
    In this matter, I share the opinion of Satanovsky E.Ya. In a nutshell, this is just a piece of paper.
  20. kit_bellew
    kit_bellew 22 December 2015 11: 37 New
    +1
    Quote: From the author
    The adopted document establishes the right of the Syrian people to determine the future of the country, said Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.


    Very well. Of course, I am not a connoisseur of international law, but unless before the adoption of "this document" the Syrian people had the right to determine the future of their country, as well as any other people? It’s possible to agree to the point that now, they say, the Syrians now have such a right, but the Iraqis (Libyans, Afghans, Egyptians, Russians) don’t, and we, the great American people, will completely break through all the cracks without soap and you all spin the horse.
  21. Shadowcat
    Shadowcat 22 December 2015 11: 52 New
    +1
    As if penguins did not start flying, and in the Sahara, snow would not fall ...
  22. Specialist 77
    Specialist 77 22 December 2015 16: 36 New
    0
    ceasefire ..... have already passed .... in the war of the 90s .... this is an occasion to give a respite .... regroup .... tighten up fresh forces .... well then it is clear why you were led .. ..tericha will not be comme il faut ..... crush with a vengeance and not listen to the “partners” (which by the way initiated the extension of sanctions) ....
  23. Kibl
    Kibl 22 December 2015 17: 01 New
    +1
    All this is crap! The USA always spit on UN resolutions, when and where they wanted to fight, they fought there! The second Iraq war is an example, without any sanctions and resolutions they invaded the country, almost a million civilians including Saddam were killed and nothing! So the new resolution is nothing It doesn’t change; there is a simple regrouping of forces for a new escalation of the conflict!
  24. Alexvl
    Alexvl 22 December 2015 18: 18 New
    0
    Americans do not care who will be in power in Syria and Assad, as such, they sneeze. They need the government to be under them, who heads it unprincipled. Anyone just to obey them (even if he arranges public executions, torture and other atrocities there). We want a pro-Russian government. They will never calmly look at a government loyal exclusively to Russia and Iran - they have already invested too much there. Even if the Syrian army controls 100% of the territory, they will be able to destabilize the situation indefinitely easily and naturally, since there are a lot of people who want to help them in the region. And this means there will be no quiet life, normal economy, pipelines and other things in which no one will invest. And people's patience is not endless.
    In general, there will be a compromise. In what form it is very difficult to imagine.
  25. Gardener91
    Gardener91 22 December 2015 18: 51 New
    0
    The United States simply changed its tactics, but the strategy remained the same — complete control over the production and distribution of energy resources in the Middle East and support for the petrodollar as an instrument of influence on the world economy in its own natural benefit.
  26. Klos
    Klos 22 December 2015 19: 58 New
    +1
    The UN has long become an international platform for violating the rights of the weak. Yugoslavia, Libya, Iraq, Syria ...
  27. ibirus
    ibirus 22 December 2015 21: 03 New
    0
    while there is nothing better than the UN, so diplomats need to work on this site.
  28. vo3
    vo3 22 December 2015 21: 25 New
    0
    The Syrian army is the main ground force in the fight against IS and in liberating its country from militants. If it wins under the leadership of Assad, who will elect the Syrian people as leader? I like the reception about non-class agreements .. We learn from the Amers, because there is nothing in the documents about Assad.
  29. Alexy
    Alexy 22 December 2015 22: 37 New
    +1
    C y to and striped. While Russia meets them, meanwhile they are expanding sanctions.
  30. cheap trick
    cheap trick 23 December 2015 00: 42 New
    0
    Americans sign contracts for the time being. It’s profitable for them. As soon as the plans change, the states put on the contracts. So, see the root of the rod as the goat was said. A USA-world-class swindler! what conversations with them can be.
  31. Thompson
    Thompson 23 December 2015 09: 45 New
    0
    Who do they take all this for? Those who are fighting are looking at each other through the scope, not wanting another dialogue.
    Are they so naive that they believe in their papers? No one will sit down at the negotiating table until either an advantage in the battles or lack of financing of the conflict is reached.