Why Did the US Decide to Arm Terrorists in Syria
President Obama, who does not want to meet the violent fate of JF Kennedy, has bowed down to war lobbies and put his signature on a decision which could open the path to World War Three.
The Syrian delegation attending the Geneva-II conference has made strong allegations against the role of the USA in the civil war in their nation, declaring that “the USA yesterday took the decision to arm terrorists in Syria.
”The Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister, Dr Faisal Mikdad, who delivered the message, added that this proved that the USA was “against a political solution” to bring peace to the country.
Commentators on the events in Syria and Geneva state that the USA’s hesitance to contribute to progress towards peace may be down to pressure from groups and individuals within and outside the USA, including lobbies for the energy and arms industries, which stand to gain from the continued violence in Syria and the Middle East as a whole.
In a statement made in front of the UN Geneva headquarters, Dr Mikdad declared that
“The USA, one of the Geneva-II architects, is proving that it is against a political solution by taking the decision to arm terrorists in Syria. We will never accept this position. We came here with good intentions. We want the spilling of blood in Syria to stop, terror to come to an end, and life to return to normal. The coalition delegation which has been called the opposition has also come out against a five article manifesto. Today too they are opposing it. Now this move has come from the USA. Despite all of these, we as the Syrian delegation are not leaving Geneva.”
Further to this public statement, the Syrian delegation additionally made a written declaration where they asserted that
“The USA’s taking of the decision to assist terrorist groups in Syria is a violation of the resolution 1373 of the UN Security Council. The USA has disregarded the resolution in question. The US administration took the decision to give military assistance to terror organisation such as al-Nusra, the Islamic Front, and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). Everyone is certain that American weapons have reached Syria.” It was further demanded that “The USA, which has sabotaged the pursuit for a political solution at Geneva-II by giving weaponry aid to terrorist, must immediately bring to an end these actions.”
Members of the Syrian delegation who evaluated the alleged US decision on military aid and their actions to Aydınlık defended the view that “By supporting with weapons aid the so-called ‘moderate groups’ waging war in Syria, the USA is aiming to increase the pressure against Damascus.” According to another view,
“The USA, which at the same time is entering a dead-end in a number of fronts, wants to give the appearance that it can force the Libya model on Syria, too. The USA, the West, and Gulf nations brought about the fall of the Gaddafi administration by arming gangs fighting the government in Libya and bombing the nation from the air and sea.
The United Nations and Arab League Special Envoy to Syria, Lakhdar Brahimi, the sides who met for four days to discuss the Syria crisis took the decision for the first time to not meet after the afternoon.
Despite issues of humanitarian aid to Homs, and the release of detainees and civilians not being solved, the sides are meeting to discuss the topic of a temporary government. The talks, however, have been obstructed by the objection of the opposition ‘Coalition Delegation’ to the Syrian government delegation’s five article basic principle manifesto and the “USA’s decision to support terrorists in Syria.”
Dr Bouthaina Shaaban, the Political and Press Advisor to the Syrian Presidency, gave her own reactions to the coalition delegation, which had not accepted the five article basic principle manifesto of the Syrian government, declaring that
“We came here to solve the problems in Syria. The issue is Western imperialism. Should Assad go, and should al-Nusra, al-Qaeda come in his place? Does the West want this? The Syrian administration is already meeting with international organisations such as the Red Cross to ‘send aid to people who are besieged in the historical city centre of Humus’, as was insisted upon by the opposition.”
In a meeting held on Monday evening, the UN Special Envoy to Syria Lakhdar Brahimi stated, “We are progressing slowly. There are differences of opinion but the sides are continuing to meet in Geneva. The opposition presented the roadmap for the implementation of the 30 June Geneva Communique. Concrete offers are yet to come from the Syrian government in relation to how the Geneva-I [Communique] can be implemented. The sides have agreed on the issue of aid being sent to those besieged due to fighting. We are meeting to discuss how this assistance can be implemented.
”When asked as to whether or not the USA had taken the decision to set military aid, such as weapons, to gangs fighting in Syria, the UN envoy replied saying “Yes, this subject was brought to the agenda by officials of the government in morning meetings. However no type of an announcement on the issue has come from the USA.”
With the pre-conference tension and anticipation putting much pressure on the two Syrian delegations and the major powers helping them to meet, advocates of peace are still being made to wait for the compromise which could open the door for peace to return to the nation. However for now, developments to help aid get to those who need it most will relieve much worry.