Sunday, November 24, 2013

Mehr neue hoffnungsvolle Signale am Horizont!

Eine Konferenz der Zivilgesellschaft in Haifa und Ramallah  für eine atomwaffenfreie Zone in Nahost wird Anfang Dezember stattfinden, ein Novum in der Geschichte des Landes. 
"Wenn Israel nicht nach Helsinki geht, dann holen wir  Helsinki nach Israel", sagen die israelischen Veranstalter unter der Schirmherrschaft von Avraham Burg. 

Die Genfer Verhandlungsrunde mit dem Iran hat endlich ein für beide, nein für alle Seiten vielversprechendes Interimsabkommen hervorgebracht. Das Gekläff aus Israel dazu darf uns nicht irre machen. Es ist ja nur das Echo der sich aufplusternden US-Senatoren, die weiter gegen das Abkommen Sturm laufen, entgegen ihrer eigenen Interessenlage. Aber auch ihnen sind Schranken auferlegt, die ökonomischen Gesetzen geschuldet sind.

In Syrien gewinnen die Regierungskräfte gegenüber den Terror-Rebellen weiter an Boden und setzen derweil Punkt für Punkt die über ihre Chemiewaffen getroffene Vereinbarung  um. Ein Grund zur Beanstandung oder gar Intervention wird nicht geliefert.

China stellt sich auf die Hinterbeine und lässt sich nicht so ohne weiteres in die Suppe mehr spucken.

Die Ukraine beugt sich nicht dem Druck eines europäischen Diktats und die südosteuropäische Minirepublik Moldau scheint es ihm gleichtun zu wollen.

Die Protestbewegungen am südlichen Rand der europäischen Herrschaftssphäre reißen nicht  mehr ab.

Es kommt Bewegung in das tektonische Erdgefüge. Die monopolare Weltordnung geht ihrem Ende entgegen. Das westliche Imperium kann dem Rest der Welt seinen Wille nicht mehr bruchlos aufdrücken.  Das zeigt Afghanistan, das zeigen  auch der Irak und Lybien. Mögen die Schatten des imperialen Fußabdrucks auch noch so bedrohlich sein. Das Ende seiner Herrschaft ist absehbar geworden. Der in Gang gekommene Prozess zeigt, dass Lösungen nicht mehr mit immer noch  mehr brachialer Gewalt zu holen sind. Der Prozess  ist umumkehrbar geworden. Es gibt kein Zurück. Die sozialpolitischen Verwerfungen, die der neoliberale Imperialismus erzeugt, kann nur neue Massenproteste hervorrufen, zu gravierend sind die Folgen für die Betroffenen inzwischen. Kompromisse sind nicht mehr möglich.

Die allerorten präventiv sprießenden, weil gut genährten, neofaschistischen  Bewegungen sind eine ebenso hilflose Antwort kapitaler Kreise, mit der sie sich gegen das bevorstehende Ende zu wehren versuchen, wie sie es nach dem ersten Weltenbrand schon einmal waren. Ihr Versuch war damals zum Scheitern verurteilt und wird es auch diesmal sein, weil seine Antwort auf die weltweite Krise, eben die Brachialgewalt, keine ist.

Wachen wir auf! Lernen wir aus der Geschichte und lesen wir die Zeichen der Zeit richtig: Krieg und Faschismus sind überwindbar durch aufgeklärtes und bewusstes, durch kollektives menschliches Handeln.
Tertium Non Datur.

Peaceful Geneva Interim Agreement with Iran !

In an early morning announcement, Tehran agreed Sunday to a six-month pause of its nuclear program while US- diplomats continue talks aimed at preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. International observers are set to monitor Iran's nuclear sites and ease about $7 billion of the crippling economic sanctions.

Putin welcomes progress at talks on the Iranian nuclear program


News | 25.11.2013 | 05:52
Russian President Vladimir Putin has hailed the results of negotiations on the Iranian nuclear program in Geneva, saying they have helped to bring closer the untangling of one of the knottiest problems in today's international policies.
The approach based on gradual steps and mutuality were reflected in full in the final document coordinated in Geneva.
The outcome of these talks will bring benefits to everyone and it proves once again that responses to today's international challenges and threats can be tapped in the process of joint and mutually respectful work, Putin said.
He stressed the willingness of Russia and its partners to continue a search for mutually acceptable and more comprehensive solution of the Iranian problem.
Voice of Russia, TASS, Voice of Russia

Iranian President discusses main outcome of Geneva talks

News | 25.11.2013 | 06:33
Recognition of Iran's right to possessing nuclear technologies by the Sextet of negotiating countries /five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany -- Itar-Tass/ is the main achievement of the talks in Geneva, the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Hassan Rouhani said Sunday.
Another achievement is the reaffirmed right to enrich uranium on the Iranian territory, he went on.
Rouhani added that the document signed in Geneva gives the nuclear facilities in Natanz, Fordo, Isfahan, and Bandar Abbas an opportunity to continue work for another six months, Fars news agency said.
As a third achivement, the Iranian President pointed to the forthcoming abolition of all the sanctions against his country introduced previously by the UN, the U.S., and Europe.
The document slated for six months and signed by the parties to negotiations in Geneva opens the door for the Iranian nation to getting new experience, Rouhani said. If members of the Sextet abide strictly by the agreement, Iran will also observe its provisions.
The talks created an atmosphere that will help generate trust between Iran and other nations, he said.

UN-Disarmament Committee Resolution Reaffirms Unanimously ""Establishment of a Nuclear-Weapon-free Zone in the Region of the Middle East"

"Preparations  of the  IAPMC committee for  the civil society conference in Haifa are well under way.
In forwarding last month's resolution adopted in Messolonghi on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the area of the Middle East to the UN Secretary-General, the President of the current session of the UN General Assembly and the three State conveners of the Helsinki Conference (Russia, UK and US), IAPMC has drawn attention to the Haifa meeting.

 The UN General Assembly's First Committee (Disarmament and International Security)  has once again adopted by consensus a resolution on the establishment of the zone. The Assembly is expected to endorse it  during the first week of December. The resolution is attached. Although it makes no reference to the proposed and postponed Helsinki conference it does underscore the need for the establishment of the zone."

United Nations
General Assembly
Sixty-eighth session
First Committee
Agenda item 95
Establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East
Egypt: draft resolution
A/C.1/68/L.1
page1image3296
Distr.: Limited 18 October 2013
Original: English
page1image4632
Establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East
The General Assembly,
Recalling its resolutions 3263 (XXIX) of 9 December 1974, 3474 (XXX) of 11 December 1975, 31/71 of 10 December 1976, 32/82 of 12 December 1977, 33/64 of 14 December 1978, 34/77 of 11 December 1979, 35/147 of 12 December 1980, 36/87 A and B of 9 December 1981, 37/75 of 9 December 1982, 38/64 of 15 December 1983, 39/54 of 12 December 1984, 40/82 of 12 December 1985, 41/48 of 3 December 1986, 42/28 of 30 November 1987, 43/65 of 7 December 1988, 44/108 of 15 December 1989, 45/52 of 4 December 1990, 46/30 of 6 December 1991, 47/48 of 9 December 1992, 48/71 of 16 December 1993, 49/71 of 15 December 1994, 50/66 of 12 December 1995, 51/41 of 10 December 1996, 52/34 of 9 December 1997, 53/74 of 4 December 1998, 54/51 of 1 December 1999, 55/30 of 20 November 2000, 56/21 of 29 November 2001, 57/55 of 22 November 2002, 58/34 of 8 December 2003, 59/63 of 3 December 2004, 60/52 of 8 December 2005, 61/56 of 6 December 2006, 62/18 of 5 December 2007, 63/38 of 2 December 2008, 64/26 of 2 December 2009, 65/42 of 8 December 2010, 66/25 of 2 December 2011 and 67/28 of 3 December 2012 on the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East,
Recalling also the recommendations for the establishment of a nuclear- weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East consistent with paragraphs 60 to 63, and in particular paragraph 63 (d), of the Final Document of the Tenth Special Session of the General Assembly,1
Emphasizing the basic provisions of the above-mentioned resolutions, which call upon all parties directly concerned to consider taking the practical and urgent steps required for the implementation of the proposal to establish a nuclear-weapon-
          __________________
1 Resolution S-10/2.
13-52109 (E) 221013
*1352109*
 page1image23072
A/C.1/68/L.1
page2image848 page2image1008
2/3
13-52109
free zone in the region of the Middle East and, pending and during the establishment of such a zone, to declare solemnly that they will refrain, on a reciprocal basis, from producing, acquiring or in any other way possessing nuclear weapons and nuclear explosive devices and from permitting the stationing of nuclear weapons on their territory by any third party, to agree to place their nuclear facilities under International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards and to declare their support for the establishment of the zone and to deposit such declarations with the Security Council for consideration, as appropriate,
Reaffirming the inalienable right of all States to acquire and develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes,
Emphasizing the need for appropriate measures on the question of the prohibition of military attacks on nuclear facilities,
Bearing in mind the consensus reached by the General Assembly since its thirty-fifth session that the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East would greatly enhance international peace and security,
Desirous of building on that consensus so that substantial progress can be made towards establishing a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East,
Welcoming all initiatives leading to general and complete disarmament, including in the region of the Middle East, and in particular on the establishment therein of a zone free of weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons,
Noting the peace negotiations in the Middle East, which should be of a comprehensive nature and represent an appropriate framework for the peaceful settlement of contentious issues in the region,
Recognizing the importance of credible regional security, including the establishment of a mutually verifiable nuclear-weapon-free zone,
Emphasizing the essential role of the United Nations in the establishment of a mutually verifiable nuclear-weapon-free zone,
Having examined the report of the Secretary-General on the implementation of resolution 67/28,2
1. Urges all parties directly concerned seriously to consider taking the practical and urgent steps required for the implementation of the proposal to establish a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East in accordance with the relevant resolutions of the General Assembly, and, as a means of promoting this objective, invites the countries concerned to adhere to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons;3
2. Calls upon all countries of the region that have not yet done so, pending the establishment of the zone, to agree to place all their nuclear activities under International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards;
3. Takes note of resolution GC(57)/RES/15, adopted on 20 September 2013 by the General Conference of the International Atomic Energy Agency at its fifty-
__________________
2 A/68/124 (Part I) and Add.1.
3 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 729, No. 10485.

seventh regular session, concerning applications of Agency safeguards in the Middle East; 4
4. Notes the importance of the ongoing bilateral Middle East peace negotiations and the activities of the multilateral Working Group on Arms Control and Regional Security in promoting mutual confidence and security in the Middle East, including the establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone;
5. Invites all countries of the region, pending the establishment of a nuclear- weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East, to declare their support for establishing such a zone, consistent with paragraph 63 (d) of the Final Document of the Tenth Special Session of the General Assembly,1 and to deposit those declarations with the Security Council;
6. Also invites those countries, pending the establishment of the zone, not to develop, produce, test or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or permit the stationing on their territories, or territories under their control, of nuclear weapons or nuclear explosive devices;
7. Invites the nuclear-weapon States and all other States to render their assistance in the establishment of the zone and at the same time to refrain from any action that runs counter to both the letter and the spirit of the present resolution;
  1. Takes note of the report of the Secretary-General;2
  2. Invites all parties to consider the appropriate means that may contribute
towards the goal of general and complete disarmament and the establishment of a zone free of weapons of mass destruction in the region of the Middle East;
10. Requests the Secretary-General to continue to pursue consultations with the States of the region and other concerned States, in accordance with paragraph 7 of resolution 46/30 and taking into account the evolving situation in the region, and to seek from those States their views on the measures outlined in chapters III and IV of the study annexed to the report of the Secretary-General of 10 October 19905 or other relevant measures, in order to move towards the establishment of a nuclear- weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East;
11. Also requests the Secretary-General to submit to the General Assembly at its sixty-ninth session a report on the implementation of the present resolution;
12. Decides to include in the provisional agenda of its sixty-ninth session the item entitled “Establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the region of the Middle East”.
__________________
4 See International Atomic Energy Agency, Resolutions and Other Decisions of the General Conference, Fifty-seventh Regular Session, 16-20 September 2013 (GC(57)/RES/DEC(2013)).
5 A/45/435.
A/C.1/68/L.1
page3image23008 page3image23168 page3image23328
13-52109
3/3 

Libya on Brink of Collapse

 

Libya on Brink of Collapse: US, Allies Step Up Emergency Measures

...An increase in crime in Libya, a destroyed economy and the lack of political control over different tribes makes Libya worse off than 2 years ago... The chances are great that step by step the US and its European allies may get embroiled in the quagmire of anarchy and chaos in an effort to make Libya remain a pro-Western state in the volatile region. The «no boots on the ground» policy may fail as «some boots» are already there while others happen to operate on Libyan soil off and on. It’s extremely hard to predict anything about the Middle East, but the task to improve things in Libya is a tall order, a real high mountain to climb. The West is paying for its own mistakes it had been warned about stepping on the same rake in Libya after the lessons it failed to learn in Afghanistan and Iraq. 
Andrei AKULOV | 24.11.2013 more 

http://www.strategic-culture.org

Zaytoun - Geborene Feinde - Echte Freunde - Film von Erik Reklis

  1. Ein neuer  fantastischer, nachdenklich machender Streifen von Erik Reklis.

    Zum Weinen und doch ermutigend auf Grund seiner tiefen Menschlichkeit.


    „Zaytoun“ ist das arabische Wort für Olive, der Ölzweig ein Zeichen des Friedens. Für den einen ist es Palästina, für den anderen Israel. Doch beide nennen dasselbe Land ihre Heimat: Mit seinem Film ZAYTOUN gelingt es dem preisgekrönten israelischen Regisseur Eran Riklis („Lemon Tree“, „Die syrische Braut“), dem historischen Konflikt zwischen Israel und Palästina ohne falsche Sentimentalität einen Funken Hoffnung zu verleihen. Als Produzent konnte der Filmemacher Gareth Unwin (Oscar® für „The King’s Speech“) gewinnen. Entstanden ist ein Film, der mit Feingefühl, starken Emotionen und einer atemberaubenden Bildsprache die Geschichte einer besonderen Freundschaft erzählt; einem Lichtblick in einem ausweglos scheinenden Konflikt... Nach seinem gefeierten Auftritt in Sofia Coppolas „Somewhere“ ist Stephen Dorff („Public Enemies“, „Krieg der Götter“) erneut in einer anspruchsvollen Hauptrolle zu sehen. Nachwuchstalent Abdallah El Akal steht in seiner Heimat Israel seit Jahren vor der Kamera und fiel bereits in Julian Schnabels „Miral“ auf. Der renommierte Kameramann Dan Laustsen („Der Pakt der Wölfe“, „Nachtwache“) begleitet das ungleiche Duo auf seinem abenteuerlichen Weg und findet auch im Krisengebiet Bilder von eindringlicher Schönheit.

    Regie:
    Eran Riklis
    Darsteller:
    Stephen Dorff, Abdallah El Akal, Alice Taglioni, Tarik Kopty, Loai Noufi, Ali Suliman u.v.m.
    Kinostart:
    14.11.2013
    Den palästinensischen Flüchtlingsjungen Fahed (ABDALLAH EL AKAL) und den über Beirut abgeschossenen israelischen Kampfpiloten Yoni (STEPHEN DORFF) verbindet auf den ersten Blick nichts. Doch ein Zufall macht aus den einstigen Feinden verbündete Weggefährten. Sie wollen zurück nach Israel und begeben sich auf den Weg durch ein vom Krieg zerrissenes Land! Heimat für beide, aus der der eine, Fahed, vertrieben wurde und für die der andere, Yoni, in einem zerstörerischen Krieg kämpft. Während Yoni nur nach Hause will, versucht Fahed vor allem den letzten Willen seines verstorbenen Vaters zu erfüllen: Den letzten verbliebenen Olivenbaum der Familie zurück in ihr palästinensisches Heimatdorf zu bringen.
    Während sie anfangs lediglich der Wille zu überleben aneinander bindet, entwickelt sich aus ihrer durch tiefes Misstrauen geprägten Feindschaft allmählich eine sehr besondere, wunderbare Freundschaft…

  2. www.trailerseite.de/.../zaytoun-kino-trailer-27804.ht...

    06.08.2013 -  Bewertung: 82% - ‎Bewertung von Jochen Becker
    Den palästinensischen Flüchtlingsjungen Fahed (ABDALLAH EL AKAL) und den über Beirut ...

New Sparkles of Hope at the Horizons with US Foreign Policy Turn in the Middle East

Obama Сhanges Direction in the Middle East

Melkulangara BHADRAKUMAR | 21.11.2013 | 00:00

The politics of the Middle East are undergoing a period of great turbulence emanating out of the changes in direction of the regional policies pursued by the United States. When the ship makes a turnaround, it has to be over an arc, and it is now possible to discern the reset of the compass.
…..
Indeed, it is palpable that the US is currently supportive of the series of diplomatic initiatives Moscow has been taking in the recent weeks in a renewed push for a Syrian peace conference. The Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov met the Syrian National Coalition [SNC] figures in Istanbul last week. The SNC has also come under American pressure to accept Russia’s invitation to go to Moscow to discuss the peace conference.
Quite obviously, the Russian and American diplomats at their next meeting in Geneva on Monday will review the progress of their work and determine the exact date of the Geneva 2 conference, which according to the announcement on Monday by the United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon can be expected in mid-December.
Equally, there has been a sea change in the US-Iran standoff. The probability is high that the ongoing meeting of the P5+1 and Iran at Geneva, which began on Wednesday, would finalize an interim nuclear deal. Contrary to the widely held impression that the Obama administration’s push to reach an interim agreement with Iran would be torpedoed on Capitol Hill, the Democratic leadership in the US Senate, in particular the heads of the Armed Services Committee, Carl Levin, and Intelligence Committee, Dianne Feinstein, have concurred that this would be a bad time to impose new sanctions against Iran when negotiations are under way.
Again, the former US national security advisors Zbigniew Brzezinski and Brent Scowcroft have written a letter to the Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid strongly pleading, “More sanctions now as these unprecedented negotiations are just getting underway would reconfirm Iranians in their belief that the U.S. is not prepared to make any agreement with the current government of Iran. We call on all Americans and the U.S. Congress to stand firmly with the President in the difficult but historic negotiations with Iran.”
Indeed, Gelb himself is on record that short-term deal “would lead to the Mideast equivalent of ending the Cold War with the Soviet Union … [and] could reduce, even sharply, the biggest threat to regional peace, an Iranian nuclear bomb, and open paths to taming dangerous conflicts in Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan.”
Thus, there is cautious optimism that an agreement can be finalized by the end of this week. The leaders of Russia, China and Britain have had telephone conversation this week with the Iranian President Hassan Rouhani. The statement issued by the White House after a two-hour meeting President Obama, along with Secretary of State John Kerry and National Security Adviser Susan Rice had with US senators on Tuesday said, "We have the opportunity to halt the progress of the Iranian program and roll it back in key respects, while testing whether a comprehensive resolution can be achieved." It warned that if there is not an initial agreement, Iran will keep making progress on increasing enrichment capacity, growing its stockpiles of enriched uranium, installing new centrifuges and developing a plutonium reactor in the city of Arak.
Meanwhile, Iran’s surprise announcement dropping its insistence that the world powers should acknowledge explicitly its right to enrich uranium deftly sidesteps a potentially tendentious aspect of the dispute and shifts the emphasis to the practical steps that can be agreed on in an interim agreement.
Of course, it is not going to be a cakewalk for the Obama administration and a showdown is still very much possible between the White House and the Congress on the Iran issue. The conflict in Syria is not so much a contentious (and emotive) issue for the US political establishment as the situation around Iran is, but then, on the other hand, everything is snowballing ultimately to how the Obama administration runs the US foreign policy in the Middle East in the remaining three years of this presidency.
What makes this a high stakes contestation is that this is both a real time fight within the US political establishment for control of current policies as also a struggle over long-term issues. Besides, the relations between the Obama administration and the Israeli government led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have entered uncharted waters and the latter has launched a full-scale attack on the entire trajectory of the US president’s Middle East policies. Compounding matters further, Israel’s concerns are not exclusively its, but are also shared by the US’s other key allies in the Middle East, especially Saudi Arabia.
The point is, due to a combination of circumstances – the searing experience in Iraq, crisis of the US economy, war weariness in the domestic public opinion as well as against the backdrop of the rebalance in Asia – Washington wishes to reduce its military “footprint” in the Middle East, whereas, the US’ alliances in the region almost pushed the Obama administration into launching new wars against Syria and Iran. In his United Nations General Assembly speech in September, President Obama virtually admitted the US’ helplessness in modulating the Arab Spring and spelt out that Washington’s core concerns in the Middle East would narrow down to four areas – protect the allies from external aggression, ensure free flow of oil, prevent proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and counter the al-Qaeda threat.
Conceivably, therefore, the US is distancing itself from its tangled alliances so as to avoid being hustled into conflicts or interventions under pressure from its closest regional allies in the event of any turmoil erupting in countries such as Egypt, Jordan or Bahrain. In a manner of speaking, the Obama administration is seeking an optimal regional policy to suit the US interests rather than the Israeli or Saudi interests. This does not mean a ‘strategic retreat’ from the region and it does not necessarily mean that the US interventionism is over and done with forever. But what it means is that Washington’s actions will be guided by the range of US interests rather than by one of playing second fiddle to Israeli demands or Saudi regional ambitions. If this reset is carried to its logical conclusion, the balance of forces in the Middle East will be transformed beyond recognition.
Suffice to say, if the P5+1 and Iran talks currently under way in Geneva do result in an interim agreement, the path leading to the Geneva 2 conference on Syria in mid-December becomes that much easier to traverse.

"Syrian External Opposition to be Forced to Sit Down" Russian Foreign Minister

How to Get the Syrian Armed Opposition to Sit down for Talks
Boris DOLGOV | 22.11.2013 | 00:00

Attempts to destroy the Syrian nationhood have not let up since March 2011, which means that they have now been going on for more than two and a half years. During this time, many tens of thousands of people have lost their lives (up to an estimated 100,000). Millions have become refugees; some of these are internal refugees who have been forced to flee their homes to escape the violence of anti-government armed groups who are particularly on the hunt for members of religious minorities – Arab Christians, Kurds and Armenians. Many are living in extremely difficult conditions and do not have enough to eat.
As a result of the pogrom actions of illegal armed groups terrorising parts of Syria, the country’s manufacturing infrastructure is being destroyed bit by bit.The crisis is being exacerbated by the sanctions that have been introduced against Syria by the US, a number of EU countries, Turkey and the monarchies of the Persian Gulf. The total amount of damage inflicted on Syria during the conflict equals nearly USD 100 million, and experts believe that rebuilding the country will take a minimum of 10 years.
Almost from the very beginning, the Syrian conflict was more than a local affair. The uncertainty of a number of socio-economic and political problems that had disgruntled parts of the population was skilfully exploited by external forces. They were able to stir up the internal Syrian conflict by financing and arming extremist groups and sending foreign mercenaries to Syria. The objective of these external forces was to overthrow Bashar al-Assad’s government, as well as fragment and destroy Syria as an ally of Iran and the Hezbollah movement. According to official figures, there are currently more than 1,000 anti-government armed groups operating in Syria. The total number of militants involved in these groups is more than 70,000. A significant number of these are foreign mercenaries from more than 80 countries around the world, including the United States, Europe, Central Asia, and areas of Russia’s Volga and North Caucasus regions.
Those supporting Syria’s “Jihadis” are not hiding the fact that they will continue to offer them their support. Saudi Arabia recently decided to allocate large amounts of money to train new Mujahideens to be sent to Syria. Also, based on statements by President Obama, it should be remembered that the United States’ planned military attack on Syria has not been cancelled, just postponed.
At the same time, an agreement in principle between Russia and the US on the need for a Geneva-2 conference is giving a certain amount of hope that a political settlement to the Syrian crisis can be found. Syria is scrupulously fulfilling all the conditions of the agreement to transfer its chemical weapons to the international community for destruction, which is confirmed by representatives of the international Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). The Syrian government has repeatedly expressed its willingness to take part in a Geneva 2 conference, and Damascus’ constructive approach to the issue of a political settlement in Syria was confirmed in a telephone conversation between Bashar al-Assad and Vladimir Putin on 14 November 2013. The internal patriotic opposition is also willing to enter into a dialogue with the authorities. This part of the Syrian opposition is made up of Cooperation Committees, which include representatives from 13 parties; the National Front for Change and Liberation; the Coalition of Forces for Peaceful Change, which includes 16 parties; and movements expressing the interests of the Kurdish community. The Kurds have already formed their own local governments in the areas where they are living in northern Syria.
As far as the external Syrian opposition is concerned, which is represented by the National Coalition of Opposition and Revolutionary Forces (NCORF) and which the West was quick to recognise as the “only legitimate representative of the Syrian people”, it has declared its willingness to take part in a Geneva 2 conference on the one hand, but on the other hand has been setting forth conditions that are deliberately unacceptable to those taking part in the conference, demanding a deadline for al-Assad’s departure and the transfer of power.
The NCORF does not by any means represent all of the external opposition. There are a number of armed opposition groups who are continuing to carry out military actions both against the Syrian army and between themselves, whilst terrorising the local population. These include the Free Syrian Army (FSA), parts of which are now breaking off into those who are moving over to the side of government forces and those who are joining up with radical Islamists. The largest Islamist groups are the Nusra Front and the Islamic State of Syria, which are affiliated with al-Qaeda.
Reaching a political solution at the Geneva 2 conference (if it takes place) is a relatively complex issue. At the same time, if there is a political will – first and foremost on the part of the leaders of the major powers and regional centres of power – finding a solution to the Syrian crisis is entirely possible. The Russian Foreign Affairs Minister announced that “the Syrian external opposition should not be persuaded to sit down for talks, they should be forced to sit down”. But how to force them? By declaring through the UN that only those political forces who agree to stop fighting and start a national dialogue will be recognised as legitimate representatives of the Syrian people. By establishing a ceasefire that all sides must abide by. Those groups that refuse to abide by the ceasefire should be recognised – also through the UN – as terrorist organisations (the Nusra Front, incidentally, is already on the United States’ list of such organisations). In accordance with a UN resolution, international sanctions should be used against these terrorist organisations and their sponsors…
Bearing in mind Russia’s increasing role in the Middle East, Russian diplomacy may well play a leading role in settling the Syrian crisis, especially since the crisis has already had a direct impact on Russia’s national security interests.