Monday, April 29, 2013

Why Russia Does Not Believe Syria Used Chemical Weapons

 After you have read..Israel: Extreme claims for geopolitical gains read below

Notice that Russia, Syria & Iran, in unison, have been reminding us all of the lies employed by the US and others that led up to the illegitimate, immoral attack on Iraq.

A general view shows Khan al-Assal area near the northern city of Aleppo, near the site where forces loyal to Syria's President Bashar al-Assad say was attacked with chemical weapons, March 23, 2013.

When talk arose within the United States and Israel of the possibility of Damascus using chemical weapons against insurgents, Moscow became alarmed. Since US President Barack Obama had earlier clearly stated that such action would be considered a casus belli, an immediate suspicion arose that a campaign to create a basis for a massive intervention in Syria was in the making. 

The problem with current international relations is the lack of means to verify information that would be regarded as trustworthy by all parties involved. In that controlled system, which existed during the Cold War years, there was certainly also room for provocations. However, the two superpowers, at the highest level of the world hierarchy, in the first place, took an interest in seeing that nothing would occur outside what they willed; secondly, they were well-aware that the price of incompetent intrigue could be unacceptable, nuclear conflict. In the conditions of intense nuclear deterrence, it was necessary to always be able to immediately assess where there was a real threat, and where there was a technology of a controllable escalation in any conflict.

Nowadays, there is neither such a feeling, nor operating mechanisms. Military-political and ideological deadlocks do not work anymore; the threats of local clashes turning into a global war hardly exist anymore. Nuclear weaponry still serves as a deterring instrument; however, specific countries use it as a warranty against non-interference into their affairs rather than a way to prevent conflicts in general. Paradoxically, universal informational transparency and the seeming abundance of data regarding all events have not enhanced mutual understanding of the processes but, on the contrary, have turned them into objects of manipulations.

In Russia, for instance, a specific, popular area of research is informational wars. It is believed that a massive concentration of public opinion in favor of the use of force has become an integral element of any campaign today. As a rule, there is always a certain jumping-off point when it all starts. A massacre in the city of Rachak in January 1999, of which the Serbian police were accused, the allegedly existing evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, information on the massive use of air force against Libyan civilians … All this appeared in the media, forming an image that took on a life of its own, and which, eventually, led to a “moral obligation” to intervene. Subsequently, it would often turn out that the initial cause had been unfounded. The story of the Iraqi weapons goes without saying; however, the incidents which became the grounds for the wars in Yugoslavia and Libya were not independently supported later on either.

All the more so, because the Institute of Independent Observers, based upon a UN mandate recognized by everyone, is becoming eroded, its credibility is compromised due to those metamorphoses and cataclysms which the UN has had to deal with after the Cold War. Either it was circumvented without asking for any sanctions, or its mandate was interpreted arbitrarily. And it is difficult to say in which role the UN inspectors in Iraq or of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe observers in Yugoslavia was more important — in their attempts to prevent a war or, on the contrary, to bring it about.

In this context, the news about the alleged chemical weapons in Syria, relying on intelligence from Israel and the United States, is naturally perceived as a step to an inevitable escalation. No doubt, an independent and credible committee under the aegis of the UN is required to carry out an inspection of any reliability of this information. Even if its membership can be agreed upon, which is no simple matter, past experience has demonstrated that, as a rule, observers getting involved in the game does not so much clarify the truth as increase the general level of manipulation and informational wars. However, if a respective government, for instance, refuses to collaborate with international inspection agencies, fearing their partiality or relying on their own assumptions regarding sovereignty, this is virtually automatically assumed to point to the fact that there is something to hide.

Recent history knows the case of the deliberate, but suicidal bluff, which Saddam Hussein attempted to play. Knowing perfectly well that he had nothing, his behavior was ambiguous: he inflated the stakes and played with inspectors, Americans and Iran. The result is well-known, so there is a hope that the remaining regional leaders have learned this lesson.

If the plot involving the use of chemical weapons continues — and that is of primary interest to the Syrian opposition and its regional patrons — then the seeming drift of Russia and Western countries toward each other, looming in the background of the Syrian impasse, may turn into a new dramatic divergence. Moscow does not believe that Assad may use chemical weapons: he is not a madman to ask for such trouble. Therefore, the emergence of such information is seen as an attempt to “turn the chessboard around” — to switch the discussion from the political and diplomatic field back to the military and coercive plane.

Moreover, nowhere — not Europe, Turkey or the United States — does there seem to be any real readiness to intervene into the Syrian conflict. Doubts regarding the feasibility of support to the opposition, which is being increasingly dominated by radical Islamic forces, are becoming more evident. The Boston events have, yet again, reminded us that the psychological conflict with the West, founded on a religious component is still there, and that it manifests itself in the most unexpected ways. Thus, the emerging excuse to toughen positions does not make it possible to untangle the deadlock, but only creates additional political complications.

If the topic does not disappear by itself soon (which is not impossible), Moscow will probably demand the most thorough and impartial investigation, refusing otherwise to trust the credibility of the information provided. The biggest problem will occur if, all of a sudden, the data concerning the use of chemical weapons will be confirmed. Then, everyone will find him/herself having to make inconvertible decisions. For now, this entire story rather resembles an informational attack.

Fyodor Lukyanov is the editor of the journal Russia in Global Affairs, published in partnership with the American magazine Foreign Affairs in the Russian and English languages.

Stark enough for ya?


  1. Talks about Syria's weapons of mass destruction: Iraqi scenario?

    "Commenting on statements made by a number of Western countries on the possible use of chemical weapons by Syria’s authorities, Lavrov said.

    "Perhaps, there are states that believe that all means are good for overthrowing the Syrian regime. However, WMDs seem to be a very serious topic, and joking with it is no good. I find it inadmissible to use it and to speculate on it for geopolitical purposes. Because of the attempt of such “geopolitical games” no investigation is being conducted into a concrete incident that occurred on March 19th and that is still an object of concern for everybody. The blame is on the countries which are trying to keep the Secretary General from giving a simple and direct answer to a concrete and direct question".

    Chemical weapons were used near Aleppo on March 19th . This fact was registered by various remote control means. The Syrian government asked the UN Secretary General to send a group of experts to investigate. Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov mentioned that Ban Ki-moon had approved its request but then - under pressure from some members of the UN Security Council – demanded that the UN inspectors be admitted to any facilities in Syria.

    "The UN Secretary General referred to the fact that it was necessary to probe into other reports about the use of poisoning substances, including among other things, what occurred near Homs last December. Everybody forgot about this. The demand of the UN Secretary General with a reference to the former episode – now forgotten – resembles an attempt to introduce in Syria a regime resembling the one that existed in Iraq, when a search for WMDs
    was conducted there"...

    вот так

  2. And speaking of stark, this wont be making the headlines of the zionist run media in the west, nor their more subtle alternative versions, either.

    Syrian organ traffickers are backed by Western organizations - official

    "An extensive network of criminal groups specializing in human organ trafficking is acting in the border areas of Syria. The bandits have an enormous amount of money at their disposal and do not hesitate to eliminate anyone who hinders them. A representative of the Commission of the Syrian Ministry of Health tasked with investigating abductions and organ harvesting allegations gave an exclusive interview to the Voice of Russia.

    Bandits operate under the cover of the leaders of insurgent groups, the Lebanese television channel al-Mayadin informed earlier.

    The Turkish press also wrote that rebels in Syria kidnap people for the purpose of cutting out their internal organs for subsequent sale. Such evidence is available at the disposal of the Syrian Ministry of Internal Affairs, where a working group was formed in order to investigate these facts. A Special Commission was created in the Syrian Ministry of Health. The Voice of Russia talked with an employee of the Commission, who asked to be called Muhammad Aus, as he is afraid to give his real name. One of his colleagues, also a member of the Commission, recently died under mysterious circumstances.

    As our interlocutor put it, it seems the insurgents have organized the trafficking of human organs on a large scale. According to him, they have an enormous amount of money at their disposal and do not hesitate to eliminate anyone who hinders them..."

    Undoubtedly this organ trafficking is being run by Tel Aviv, as is the vast majority of this is worldwide. There is a common saying that where the CIA goes, so does the drug mafia. Well, where one finds Mossad and Israelis operating, one finds human organ trafficking.

    вот так

    1. Did you notice the story regarding Kosovo and Organ trafficking
      Trial took place in NATO's terror state
      Thaci has long, been connected to trafficking of all sorts
      Two people are still at large
      One Israeli, One Turk

      Two foreign nationals — Dr. Yusuf Sonmez, the Turkish surgeon named as a key figure in the criminal enterprise, and Moshe Harel, an Israeli accused of being the financial organizer — remain at large, wanted under an Interpol “Red Notice.”

      So, they caught the small fries and the ring leaders, particularly the financial organizer, the man who makes it all possible "remain at large"

  3. Fyodor Lukyanov is a good example of the difference in quality between Russian & Western analysts - an analyst working in the 'mainstream' of Russian thinktanks who consistently delivers high quality, well reasoned & researched papers.
    Compare his work to the self-serving garbage coming out of the US mainstream thinktanks you can really see just how far the West has sunk in its' critical thinking capability.

    Of interest on this subject is a couple of pieces that I found making the rounds on 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 pathetic as it sounds.

    The moral legitimacy of unapproved humanitarian interventions Part 1
    The moral legitimacy of unapproved humanitarian interventions Part 2

    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.

    1. You know KenM it is so hard to read that kind of tripe
      There is no such thing as humanitarianism in warfare
      Bombing the people to smithereens to save them, is not even credible
      Reading the pieces is like going through a maze of excuses and justifications that have nothing to do with human rights.

      You are right, it is garbage, sanctimonious garbage.

  4. I left this link before-
    Chemical inspection stalled: UN team can’t be trusted ‘politically’ without Russian experts – Syrian information minister

    I expect that Russia will be allowed on the UN team and then Syria will allow the inspections which will not be limited to the Chlorine attack - if the Chlorine attack is even investigated at all. That then will be Russia's acid test of whether they have been bought-off by the Globalists.

    Syria made a major blunder in requesting an investigation by the UN over a relatively minor Chlorine attack, IMO. Surely they know by now that the UN is not an honest broker. Wearing my hat of cynicism I wonder what the Russian advice was on that matter.

    Oh dear, breaking news on RT-

    A massive car explosion has been reported in central Damascus with the Syrian Interior Ministry, a big hotel and a market located nearby. Local media report many have been injured.


    1. Yah, the so called team has been in Cyprus for more then 3 weeks now..

      "Syria made a major blunder in requesting an investigation by the UN over a relatively minor Chlorine attack, IMO. Surely they know by now that the UN is not an honest broker"

      In hindsight I would agree.
      They (Syria) have gone to the UN all along. With different complaints. On Golan. On terrorist attacks. The chemical weapons attack was not anything unusual.
      The UN should be disbanded completely IMO

    2. Syria went to the UN and filed a complaint when Israel struck Damascus, also
      Israel lied and said it struck in Lebanon, as if that was any better?

  5. You need to go back to the Joker.
    In all these issues, the Joker can't be ignored or forgotten. News coming out from the White House that a new push by the so called Arab League led by Qatar pm, now says, a new deal is acceptable that would include changes to the 1967 borders.
    This please the USIsrael and many western countries as they would see a possible agreement in the offing. The biggest obstacle to this is Syria. Syrians have always rejected a change to 1967 borders for peace. But, by keeping the conflict alive in syria, and keeping syria out of the league, they would have no say and Qatar would have managed to sell Palestine to israel, cheap.