 |
| Robert Fisk |
Finally some honest reporting from inside Syria! Two articles by Robert Fisk which I highly recommend to everybody:
The Syrian Army Believes They Are Winning
Syria and Sarin Gas: US Claims Have a Very Familiar Ring
I have my points of strong disagreement with Robert Fisk, in particular about Hezbollah and the Hariri family, but at least I respect him for his courage (physical and intellectual) and his integrity.
I find the first article most interesting because it fully corroborates what Russian analysts have been saying: the Syrian Army has fully recovered, it is beating back the insurgency, and its morale is excellent.
This is very, very good news, but this also means that the US/NATO/al-Qaeda coalition has only one possible card to play: a direct military intervention (Bosnia anybody?).
The Saker
I would like to know your thoughts Saker, on the following article by Sibel Edmond:
Boston Terror Update 2-April 25: The Syria Objective is Nearly Accomplished?
http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2013/04/25/boston-terror-update-2-april-25-the-syria-objective-is-nearly-accomplished/
@Mari: Hi my friend. I hope that you are well.
I have to tell you that I totally disagree with this article. First, there are 40’000 Russians in Syria, evacuating 100 means nothing at all. Second, the Russians do not want out, they want ‘in’. The public opinion is solidly behind the Syrian people and the Syrian Army, even if Assad himself is not too popular personally. I don’t believe that Assad used chemical weapons, and I am absolutely sure that the Russians know everything there is to know about what is taking place in Syria. Hence, they not only know that it was not the Syrian Army, they probably even know who did it. Then the Russians do not need any US backing in their war against terrorism in the Caucasus, if only because they already won that war, and they won at a time when the US was backing the terrorists.
Now, I *do* believe that there is a risk of US/NATO military intervention, but I am absolutely sure that there was no behind the scenes bargain made with Russia about this, if only because as long as Putin is in power the Russians will never trust the US. However, while the risks of a US/NATO intervention are real, there are also signs that the US is seeking some kind of deal with Iran. Invading Syria does not strike me as a good move in this context.
So no, I have to say that I disagree with 97% of this article.
Cheers!
The Saker
RE: Fisk, he comes out with some interesting articles & is always worth a read, but he seems to me to be stuck in the worldview of the 70’s/80’s when the PLO & secular nationalists were the ‘progressive’ voice in the Middle East, & has trouble adjusting to new realities on the ground.
Some of his articles seem spot on, others make me wonder who the hell he has been talking to & what was he drinking at the time…
—
In regards to “a direct military intervention”, here are a couple of pieces that I found that are looking to make the ‘legal’ case for intervention in Syria.
Cherry-picked information dressed in legalistic garb looking to justify the ‘successes’ of the R2P doctrine, whose conclusions are as dubious as it sounds.
The moral legitimacy of unapproved humanitarian interventions Part 1
http://www.offiziere.ch/?p=11536
The moral legitimacy of unapproved humanitarian interventions Part 2
http://www.offiziere.ch/?p=11674
This is the garbage that will be floating around EU & US policy circles as they look to dress up their corrupt ambitions in moralistic self-righteousness.
In my humble opinion, the whole edifice that these corrupt ‘moralists’ have created is one of the largest dangers facing humanity, & they should be held accountable for the immense damage they have caused.
KenM:Fisk, he comes out with some interesting articles & is always worth a read, but he seems to me to be stuck in the worldview of the 70’s/80’s when the PLO & secular nationalists were the ‘progressive’ voice in the Middle East, & has trouble adjusting to new realities on the ground. Some of his articles seem spot on, others make me wonder who the hell he has been talking to & what was he drinking at the time…
Yes, *exactly*, this is also my feeling.
In my humble opinion, the whole edifice that these corrupt ‘moralists’ have created is one of the largest dangers facing humanity, & they should be held accountable for the immense damage they have caused.
Exactly. As far I know, the intellectual foundation for “humanitarian interventions” was created by the French philosopher Jean-Francois Revel who coined the expression “droit d’ingerence” (right of interference) in 1979. But this concept was only instrumentalized in Bosnia when, for the first time if I am not mistaken, a patently illegal intervention was justified under the excuse of higher humanitarian considerations. And ever since, the world has been going downhill.