The Russian proposal that might open the deadlock over the Syrian intervention or the rhetorical statement of John Kerry going against his own hidden agenda

Nobody expected this turning after the joint press conference of the Foreign Secretary of Great Britain William Hague and US Secretary of State John Kerry the past 9^th of September 2013 in London. As it appears while answering to a journalist question about which options did the government of Syria have, to avoid the confrontation, Kerry said that if all chemical weapons were handed over to international control, and eventually destroyed, an attack may be reconsidered. As it seems Kerry never thought that such an idea could become the springing board for the Russian Foreign Secretary Serguei Lavrov, to make this very offer to his Syrian counterpart Wallid Mouallem. He also added to the demand the need of subscribing the international Convention about Chemical Weapons Prohibition. Only a few hours later the Syrian government acceded fully to it, to the surprise of some of the current players, still looking how to promote an intervention in the country. As Ban Ki-Moon openly acknowledged the Russian plan, that in fact will need a great amount of effort of the UN, as a key player, suddenly the US State Department said first that the demand was being said in a rhetorical way by the US Secretary. Then Obama himself took himself some time for this subject in one of his numerous interviews given that same day on US television, that this same offer was “potentially positive”, but needed to be absolutely authentic.

In any case what does seem self-evident is that far from reaching a general consensus over the intervention in his last international tour through Western Europe, John Kerry, with or without the intention, gave the magic words to avoid it, giving way to a political solution. As it seemed there was none in the opinion of the Obama administration. The fact that Russia took over the argument, could weaken the argument of the inevitability of the intervention. The relative concession that Obama had to give to the proposal is only degraded by this powerful doubt, that anything coming from the Syrian Government isn´t trustworthy. Furthermore the new events should not interfere with the upcoming quest for the bill in the Congress concerning the limited intervention in Syria, to be duly approved by enough Congressmen. This battle is the beginning of the war the president is looking for,  and  having dropped the appearance neutrality this could only go through a tough marketing of the war, which isn´t a normal one, just a limited one, they say in the Hill.

While the general ambiance in Washington is mainly around the Syrian issue and as the next session in the Congress scheduled for this Wednesday, this has been postponed again, only making the happening of the event more uncertain and less immediate than expected. And again the French government has shown their likeliness to follow the US path to war, still doesn´t see yet the positive signs for doing this openly. Nor the British Prime Minister Cameron, after the big blow of the Parliament, having lost in his seek for a bill to be passed, allowing military intervention in Syria. Due to this limitation, he should be out of the club of this new potential Coalition of the willing, still under the Bush II administration.

If Bashar was to show any collaboration in this new political draft, his position would improve by far, as he will be having a whole new UN presence working for the recollection of all Syrian chemical arsenal as a shield preventing any hits from the sea. As for the starting consideration, that bombing military infrastructure, specially containing Chemical Weapons, is far from being helpful in order to insure the safeguard and control of those. If Damascus allows the complete destruction of the existing material an important argument would have been neutralized by Bashar Al-Assad, until the results of the other UN team in Rotterdam, Netherlands gives finally its results of the analysis of the alleged chemical attack of the past 21 August in the outskirts of Damascus. These should either way give a reason to resolve the enigma around the authorship and accountability that some countries have determined in advance, as being the government forces of Assad. Despite the proven responsibility of the rebels in the other alleged chemical attacks of Aleppo in march 2013  showed the link to the rebel forces, still doesn´t dismantle in the eyes of the logical and self-evident impossibility of the oppositional forces to handle these kind of devices.

Once the premise should be granted by the Syrians, it would be quite difficult for Obama to promote his limited war, as the main objectives would have been destroyed beforehand. Then again in the midst of harsh political times for the president, when critics inside are growing on the left of the Democrats as of the extreme right of the Republicans, it seems quite obvious his approach to take over international leadership. This will eventually require the back up of a certain majority in both chambers, nevertheless it looks as if even his own party is not really willing to go into another conflict, and not getting very much convinced of the arguments given to the Congressmen and Representatives. As a matter of fact his first front line seems to be inside the US, wining the approval for his military quest. Then would come the real thing, if until then, any surprise effect will be second to none. Even more, if there weren´t any chemical weapons to hunt, isn´t this getting an obsession of the hawk side of Obama, who after giving his smoothest side, even getting the Peace Nobel Price, now shows us his Rambo side of his government.

The true leadership of the new coalition might fall apart if the evil Syrian were to be disarming for true. The statements on this of the Obama himself, were that his offensive approach was the only way of getting a consensus for a political solution. Once again war is  just an extension of politics to the governing class. If this had been his original inclination, why then doesn´t he aborts his quest for the forsaken bill for intervention against any international law? Still all of his statements show a poker face of someone who in the past had shown people the new hope, the new leadership of the US. To the deception of many his real intention are by far quite similar to the ones of his predecessor, only the skin colour does make a certain difference to the eye.

Finally if the planned attack was to occur, as soon as possible, the latter conclusion would be that this new humanitarian interventionism isn´t open to any autonomous and proactive enemies. They obey to an image, a mold of the evil, but never give in to anything, as they are tyrants. Still this particular tyrant shows quite a resistance, and is close to put the Us strategy at stake with its own arguments. If the US are naturally world players, used to these games, then how can someone understand how  they are having such a hard time to actually persuade even their closest partners to join them. Or are they running out of arguments by now? 

The quest for the Geneva II Agreement or the Syrian deadlock put in evidence

The war in Syria also is within words in the medias, as the diplomatic activity in search for the possible Geneva II agreement is still in sight, according at least to Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, as for the US Secretary of State, John Kerry at the last meeting in Washington last 9^th of August. Nonetheless neither of the parts could actually agree on a fixed time and place, in which to organize the summit. As for John Kerry, who said that the commitment of the Syrian Opposition to attend the Swiss summit was clear, there was this condition, that a transitional government was established, with no place for the current Syrian president Bashar Al-Assad. On his side, Lavrov stated that the Syrian government was determined to attend the summit without preconditions. Still there were statements of the Prime Minister, in which it was said, that no sovereignty was given into consideration, in response to one of the demands of the opposition asking a transitional government.

In the next week a bilateral meeting will take place at The Hague, Netherlands, where the Russian Foreign Deputy Vice minister Guennadi Gatilov and Wendy Sherman, the US Undersecretary of State will be treating the technical aspects of the Summit, as for ratifying the reached agreement. The actual relations of both Foreign Ministers are by far more productive, than those on the presidential level, as Barack Obama has had a mixed result in his last meeting in Northern Ireland for the past G8 meeting.

Meanwhile the Saudi monarchy has been deploying its influence in the region, reaching to open a corridor for weapons and money supply through Jordan, an action to which the government of Amman was openly was opposed to. Still the transit through the common borderline is more than active, maintaining thus a vital and essential supply line to the Syrian opposition, after the town of  Quassyr was taken back by the regular forces of Syria, interrupting directly the transit to Lebanon. Also stands the fact that outskirts of Aleppo are being  taken back by the Syrian government in recent weeks.

The main obstacle, as it seems in this major split inside the Syrian society, is due to the fact, that probably the length of time has radicalized the positions to a point of no return. In this way the government will not cease to face the terrorist organizations with all means in his power, to recover the unity and peace in his country, as the opposition refuses to deal with the Assad regime, and looks forward for a totally new government. The question which remains, above any certainty expressed by the Arab League  representative, Lahdar Brahimi, and many other spokesmen in this chain of events, if the two factions opposed, could ever consider to implement a cease-fire. This has been tried in the past, with poor success, even if it appeared, as if the regime of Damascus was being at bay, and calm ruled for few hours, not even days. Still, the war dynamic was back into its former confrontation very soon.  

The Syrian Opposition has shown little unity on some specific terms, as if they could negotiate face to face with Assad´s government. When in a strong moment, they seem very willing to go to the negotiating table, but in times of drawback, they claim their goal is to liberate the country, therefore, they won´t agree anymore. The government has repeatedly shown its good will to go, always under the assumption, that they are seen as an executive power, and being respected as such. It is quite uncertain, how both aspirations and needs will be attended by Brahimi and generally by the big powers in charge of the main round, Russia and the USA.

 The back bone of the support of each side has evidently a superpower and geostrategic reasons for its existence. The USA and the Western European countries, at least most of them, are eager to establish a new order on Syrian soil. Their main reason to do such, resembling once again to the old cold war style, being to conquer power, driven by the People´s will, or at least on their behalf, but with a hidden agenda, of splitting once again the former Ottoman Empire nearly 100 years after its collapse and fragmentation. 

The all so celebrated new freedom waves of the Arab Revolution have somehow lost a bit of their freshness. The troops are being attended in increasing number by foreign fighters, coming from al the Arab world, and furthermore from European nations, but by belief Muslims. This brings into the debate, the Syrian national compound of the Free Syrian Army, which at the most is composed by a minority of Syrians. Their dependency on foreign help makes them quite helpless, when the supply lines fail. Still their unity seems to rely on the non-definition of the future Syria to be built, solely on the will of tumbling Assad from power. Therefore their statements rarely are definitive or reliable on the long run, as they have changed opinions several times, or simply failed to reach an agreement from within.

The president Bashar Al-Assad has then again shown a good will of resistance, as worse times than today have been in his two years struggle to recover the integrity of his nation. Despite the relative isolation, his position has been kept, and furthermore has recovered some places lost in the past to the opposition. Still the economy has passed entirely to a war modus, as business as usual gets more and more difficult to be done.  He has had to ask for a credit to Russia, as well as orders of weapons, as the turmoil is being stretched in time.

The deadlock remains as it was, while the hope on the Geneva II Agreement dwells away the longer it is postponed. Until then, every party in this civil war will stay on his position, waiting for the other to make a move. This chess game could last very long, only time will tell.