http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/22/syria-peace-talks-assad-future
The arrogance of Kerry and to only a slightly lesser extent Hague, demonstrating the hypocrisy and duplicity of the "Western Powers" in their continued campaign to find any excuse to attack Syria, no matter what the people of the United States or United Kingdom may say. At yesterday's (Wednesday 22nd January 2014) opening speeches to what has been described as "Geneva 11", and at news conferences later in the day, Kerry launched astonishing attacks on the so called "Assad Regime" in speeches full of rhetoric, unsubstantiated allegations and distorted history.
It is indeed ironic that, after the uncompromising speech from Walid Muallem Syria's foreign minister, criticising the Western Powers for supporting with arms and finance the terrorism of the rebel groups, the US State Department should condem what it called Muallem's "inflammatory rhetoric". The irony of their own hypocrisy is frequently lost on American "spokes persons".
Having already succeeded in forcing Bank Ki-moon and the United Nations to withdraw an invitation to Iran to attend this conference, it was clearly evident that Britain and the United States felt confident that their support for the "Syrian Opposition" aided by Saudi Arabia and some other Gulf States, would be warmly received in the conference hall and by the worlds media and that consequently the Syrian government delegation would somehow be pressurised even further. The stimulation of public opinion in the west towards supporting intervention in Syria has increased with the publication of photographs and a report detailing atrocities allegedly carried out by the Syrian government. There are of course no allegations of atrocities alleged to have been carried out by "opposition forces", as that would not suit the intentions of the west. The propaganda campaign on television and in the media, will no doubt intensify over the coming days and weeks with the objective of galvanising public opinion in support of intervention.
Syrian foreign minister Walid Muallem, despite an interruption from Bank Ki-moon and audible mutterings from other delegates, argued that “The West claims to fight terrorism publicly while they feed it secretly. Syrians here in this hall [who] participated in all that has happened, they implemented, facilitated the bloodshed and all at the expense of the Syrian people they claim to represent”. and in a remark addressed directly to the Opposition delegation added “If you want to speak in the name of the Syrian people, you should not be traitors to the Syrian people or agents in the pay of enemies of the Syrian people.”
There is clearly a chasm between the Syrian government delegation and the western backed rebel opposition. Kerry and the west are interested only in the removal of Bashar al-Assad and in finding some justification for military intervention to achieve that objective, while at the same time, Damascus seek to address what they see as the spreading threat of terrorism in Syria and the region generally. The position of President Al Assad is not on the agenda.
It is difficult to see how these two diametrically opposed positions can ever be reconciled.
Syria peace talks: John Kerry leads calls for removal of President Bashar al-Assad
| U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon |
The arrogance of Kerry and to only a slightly lesser extent Hague, demonstrating the hypocrisy and duplicity of the "Western Powers" in their continued campaign to find any excuse to attack Syria, no matter what the people of the United States or United Kingdom may say. At yesterday's (Wednesday 22nd January 2014) opening speeches to what has been described as "Geneva 11", and at news conferences later in the day, Kerry launched astonishing attacks on the so called "Assad Regime" in speeches full of rhetoric, unsubstantiated allegations and distorted history.
It is indeed ironic that, after the uncompromising speech from Walid Muallem Syria's foreign minister, criticising the Western Powers for supporting with arms and finance the terrorism of the rebel groups, the US State Department should condem what it called Muallem's "inflammatory rhetoric". The irony of their own hypocrisy is frequently lost on American "spokes persons".
Having already succeeded in forcing Bank Ki-moon and the United Nations to withdraw an invitation to Iran to attend this conference, it was clearly evident that Britain and the United States felt confident that their support for the "Syrian Opposition" aided by Saudi Arabia and some other Gulf States, would be warmly received in the conference hall and by the worlds media and that consequently the Syrian government delegation would somehow be pressurised even further. The stimulation of public opinion in the west towards supporting intervention in Syria has increased with the publication of photographs and a report detailing atrocities allegedly carried out by the Syrian government. There are of course no allegations of atrocities alleged to have been carried out by "opposition forces", as that would not suit the intentions of the west. The propaganda campaign on television and in the media, will no doubt intensify over the coming days and weeks with the objective of galvanising public opinion in support of intervention.
 |
| Syrian foreign minister Walid Muallem |
Syrian foreign minister Walid Muallem, despite an interruption from Bank Ki-moon and audible mutterings from other delegates, argued that “The West claims to fight terrorism publicly while they feed it secretly. Syrians here in this hall [who] participated in all that has happened, they implemented, facilitated the bloodshed and all at the expense of the Syrian people they claim to represent”. and in a remark addressed directly to the Opposition delegation added “If you want to speak in the name of the Syrian people, you should not be traitors to the Syrian people or agents in the pay of enemies of the Syrian people.”
There is clearly a chasm between the Syrian government delegation and the western backed rebel opposition. Kerry and the west are interested only in the removal of Bashar al-Assad and in finding some justification for military intervention to achieve that objective, while at the same time, Damascus seek to address what they see as the spreading threat of terrorism in Syria and the region generally. The position of President Al Assad is not on the agenda.
It is difficult to see how these two diametrically opposed positions can ever be reconciled.
Comments
Post a Comment