The failure of the Geneva II Agreements or the hidden agenda of Western Democracies towards another failed state in Syria

The Syrian issue has become once again the topic of the major players of the so called International community. From the war of statements to the plain war, as it seems lies a gap, which is lesser and lesser. The alleged attack of Chemical weapons on civilian population occurred on the past 21 August in the outskirts of the Syrian capital Damascus has been put as a burden by both parties of this clash on the other one. It is said by the Rebel´s side that the attack was undertaken by government forces, producing around a 1300 death toll. On the other side, the government itself held the opposition responsible for it, as it denied having used, nor even possessing such weapons at all. The fact is that the tunnels which were apparently discovered by Syrian regular soldiers showed evidence of used shells and related material, of a toxic gas, that as a matter of fact affected the troops who were present at the time, proving that at least for the time being, there is presence of such poisonous armament. Despite the undergoing investigations held by a UN group on Syrian soil, still in process, some players are going ahead of time, accusing without any proof the undeniable responsibility of the regime, therefore considering all options on the table, including the intervention by the USA. The US-army has deployed two warships to the Eastern Mediterranean, close by the desired target, before even any conclusions were drawn by the UN.

The Geneva II Peace Talks are now officially outdated as it appears, as the Rebels have disclosed any possibility of them happening, by openly refusing to sit at the negotiating table. The UK government has also shown its confidence that as the Rebels couldn´t possibly uphold such weaponry; it must have been done by the regime itself, still leaving a small doubt in case. Anyhow Prime Minister David Cameron not only showed support to Obama´s intentions to intervene on a limited scale in Syria by Thursday. He also called the Parliament to gather together, to bring up a very much needed position in case this week there should be any attacks on Syrian targets by the Us-army. As well the French government has given its approval of these possible measures that are said to punish the Syrian president for its behavior before its own people. It certainly also is one of the major supporters of the idea of arming on an official basis the rebels, who seem to be losing the war on the ground.

The allies of the regime of Assad, mainly Russia and China show no will to change sides. The Saudis having tried to bribe the Russian government , this proved to be a big blow, as Moscow doesn´t seem to change its mind before an offer of 15 billion dollars on the table. The recent attempts to bring both sides on an agreement has once again failed, as for some reason the SNC is unwilling to any concession which wouldn´t include the downfall of Bashar Al-Assad as a precondition. Their most radical wing, the Al-Nusra Front openly defied the regime, having intentions to establish even a separate state within Syria under Sharia law. Some reports have even given a non-official statement that Al-Nusra is in fact in possession of such weapons, and would have been behind the events, that the UN is desperate to reveal. It looks as if some in this game are really not interested in having the naked truth seen at daylight.

The US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel has said that all the options are within reach, until the President made a choice, which would inevitably mean that by Thursday the US-army could be effectively intervening in the scene, hitting strategic points within the country for 48 hours. These operations that obviously don´t count on the granting of a UN resolution in its support, would only be followed by some NATO-countries, including Turkey which neighbors Syria in its Northern border. So again we see the Humanitarian war, the Clinton doctrine used in the case of Kosovo back in 1998-1999. The reasons are moral and ethical but certainly lack any real ground or justification, beyond these considerations said before. Secretary of State John Kerry also said that these undeniable atrocities were only held accountable to the government, actions which it will have to stand up to in front of the International Community.

Some other NATO members such as Germany or Italy have been more reserved on this issue, as they say that without any official UN mandate there would be no possibility of them being involved in such actions. In facts the Italian Foreign Minister Emma Bonino said in a press conference, that lacking such support, neither would they take part, nor would they allow anyone to use their military facilities for this purpose. Germany instead, with its past war experience, and considering that General elections are coming up soon, no one really is eager to support that kind of venture, fearful of losing popular support, hence the possibility to be in charge of taking part of the next German government.

Russia on its side has shown its full allegiance to the government of Damascus, as its president Vladimir Putin said that there is a hidden agenda behind these accusations, and that Bashar Al-Assad isn´t behind this, but the rebels. Its alliance is strong, as well as their presence in the port of Tartus will remain as such, despite the growing military tensions in the neighboring waters. In any case Russia will not give in to any pressure to topple Assad, nor will it provide the legitimacy to the venture underway. As things appear to be, the UN Security Council will not be in a position to give any ground the intentions of Paris, London or Washington. An against any odds, this will not hinder them in acting in their interest, with or without the UN mandate, as long as the so-called International Community, themselves, are backing them up.           

Nevertheless the results of the investigations are being slow, and were furthermore delayed by snipers which shot on the UN official vehicles under way to the places of evidence, which happened to be in a region controlled by the armed opposition, this hasn´t frightened them to go on in their crucial work to get the truth, as they postponed the next ride until the damaged vehicle was to be replaced. If they achieve their goal is uncertain, as the security in the rebel held zone is not granted by any means. Unless the government recovered this area, then only there is a common ground on which to work.

This could be the beginning of the REAL war, after the war of words. Neither the veto powers in the UN nor international law will further avoid the confrontation, some players are eager to push forward. No negotiations had any success, as for some reasons the SNC wasn´t able to make the slightest concession to the government, instead they were looking to accomplish their ultimate goal by all means, but never give in to anything. That is why probably the Geneva II Agreement, as well as The Hague Summit which was to be held in order to prepare the ground for the Geneva tables, between Russia and the US will never become reality. The hawks in Washington will have prevailed for now, until Obama takes the step that they are waiting for so long, the intervention on the ground. They call this Nation-building, democratization of any society, one size fits all. The history give us the proof that nor in Kosovo, nor in Libya, nor Iraq, nor in the former Yugoslavia in general terms this has proven to be possible. In the best of the results, there appears a failed state instead, with a chronic need of foreign help on a long term basis.  If this was to be the future of Syria under the SNR, may the reader consider all sides, and see, if this is really such a bright horizon for the Syrians, who have already withstood two years of continuous wars and human and material losses.

If this doesn´t touch the ones who want to overthrow the Bashar regime, it is questionable just how far their deep feelings of humanity are real, and how honest they are being towards letting the Syrians be free within their own state to choose their faith and government.

The second round of elections in Mali or the dilemma of ruling a failed state

Mali just had the second round of the presidential elections, which are bound to give the sub-saharian country a new political framework. After the results of the first round of the past 28 July 2013, none of the 25 candidates reached the 50% score, therefore heading to the second round on the past Sunday 11 of August instead. Out of the first round the two most voted candidates were confronted, Ibrahim Boubacar Keïta (IBK) with 39.23% in the first place, and Soumaïla Cissé with 19.40% of the ballot.

The pretty tight electoral calendar, which was set just a month in advance, was in fact one of the weak points of this event, as in the first place many thought that either the country simply wasn´t in condition in such a short notice, and second, that the Ouagadougou Agreements, which eventually led to a transitional compromise between the government  and the MNLA (National Movement for the Liberation of Azawad) forces in the north, just before, on the 19 June, on the promise of restraining from any activity, and keeping away from urban centers like Kidal in the north, held ever since the uprising by these Touareg rebel group. Nevertheless, other groups, some of them linked to the Al-Qaeda network also operate in the area and in neighboring countries, Niger, Algeria and Mauritania, who are also responsible for the major regional unrest, in what was considered in the past as a safe Democratic safe haven in western Africa.

The feasibility of the elections were also put at stake for another quite powerful reason, that many Malians eligible to vote were either outside the country, probably in some of the many refugee camps in Niger and Burkina, among others, and couldn´t possibly get their documentations on time for the voting,  despite the major effort done by the diplomatic representations of Mali, keen on closing that breach,but  it appears, as if at least 30% of the around 6.8 million voters was unable to produce such documents on time. Then the fact that the task to observe this event gets into a lot of practical issues, when it comes to cover the vast northern portion of the country, specially areas which were for the past year under rebel rule, of the MNLA or the MUJAO, allegedly in touch with the Al-Qaeda.

Anyhow, the result being in process, the real reason behind this race against all odds is in part due to the fact that France, the former ruling colonial power has been present ever since January of the current year, looking to reunite the nation, which was at the brink of collapse just a year ago. The French intervention, given with the approval of the UN Security Council, had an expiry date, in which Paris had to produce a viable, united country under an elected government. This precondition gave the French government no other option than to force by all means these events. As said before, this has been far from idealistic, and still the African Union has given its green light, by stating that there were clean and fair. The again the participation rate of the first round, which accounted for around 50% could possibly not be reached this time, as not only the enthusiasm had dropped since, and added that the climate didn´t really help, with heavy rains by the time of the voting.

The result by now looks quite positive for IBK, who presume the best result in general terms, as  it is the third time he stands as a candidate, before in 2002 and in 2007, as for his experience as prime minister under former president Amadou Toumani Touré (ATT)  among different other positions of responsibility. His next opponent, SoumaÏla Cissé lies with 19% in a much weaker position and is expected to fall back in support, considering the clear advantage IBK has shown in the past round, as for general  estimates of results.

Mali is and remains a country shaken up by several issues at the time. A rebellion in the north, a coup d´état by the general Sanogo, whom by the way still remains in his position of commander in chief. His active participation in the ousting of ATT back in 2012 didn´t made  him lose his post, and as a matter of fact Dioncounda Traoré has had to deal with him all along the line, until a new political framework was set. This is done finally against all security and procedure matters, and in conditions far from the norm.

France is the real player, as it is Paris who is the most interested partner in seeing a newly elected president,  no matter if he can actually govern on the long term. The necessity of having a positive outcome meant for Francois Hollande his reputation, as he entered this war  playground with little margin and a big expectancy of heightening a bit his popularity in his own country. His bet was quite risky, but had at least the propaganda of putting him as a commander in chief of the French Army, and a position of strength he desperately needed, while facing a dropping acceptance by his former voters. Ending the play is at least as important, as commencing it. France does not need a permanent military front, now that money is running short and the deficits eat up the dim growth available. So it is clear, that the choice was made on a political basis, and not with real economic figure.

In the following days the results may arise in the press, as soon as most of the voting recounts as done. In any case with only two candidates left, the chosen one will have a big margin of victory, capable of enabling him to put his house in order. The duties are much, the money few, and the constrains quite overwhelming. In this context, the next president of the Republic of Mali, has more work than glory, whilst the military under the rule of general  Amadou Sanogo, who  is still in his throne, until further notice.

May  the future be bright for the Malian people in this coming time, but the truth is that whomever gets this position, has to prove the ability of handling quite a bit of a mess, which was left behind in the past two years of rebellion and disorder.