Reports on this weekend’s talks on Syria suggest Russia is planning to propose an 18-month period of reform in the nation, leading to free elections. This encompasses the long-standing Russian goal of uniting the existing Assad government, a close ally, with secular rebel faction to fight ISIS.
The proposal hasn’t even formally been made yet, but it’s already facing condemnation from multiple factions involved in the Vienna talks, particularly Saudi Arabia and its allies, who insist that any deal for free elections must explicitly exclude the participation of leaders of the current government.
Saudi Foreign Minister Adel Jubeir insisted that under all circumstances, Assad has to be removed from power, and that if he doesn’t voluntarily resign he will be removed “in a military manner.”
British officials similarly downplayed the Russian proposal, saying it isn’t “central” to the discussions in Vienna, while various rebel factions similarly rejected the idea of free elections if Assad was allowed to participate.
Let me get this straight: The KINGDOM OF SAUDI ARABIA is telling Syria how to conduct Syrian elections and what Syrians may run for Syrian government offices? What does our democracy-spreading US Government have to say on this subject? That the Saudi King is a well qualified expert on democratic elections? I frankly do not think that we have a single sane "leader" in Washington these days. What an utterly disgusting Government we have here in the Land of the Submissive and the Home of the Paranoid.
I don't think the Saudis care about democracy. They just want to get Putin out of the region and Putin shows no sign of caring about democracy either, be it in Syria, Ukraine or Russia. The best way to get Putin out is to bog him down in an unending and unwinnable guerilla war and the best way to do that is to play him at his own game and stall.
I've read that the proposals indicate the russians are willing to drop Assad. There is another interpretation: they think it's a hollow concession because Assad has no credible opponents.
There are radicals, lots of foreigners, and powerless moderates.
Essentially, everybody knows that all Putin wants is to keep his naval base and that, he believes, requires keeping Assad in power. Thus, as in Ukraine, he first tries to get what he wants by military force. When he's defeated, he wants to "negotiate" but in fact is stalling hoping to put off a solution as long as possible. In Syria, though, that just bogs him down even more. As a practical matter, I don't see how a free and fair election, with or without Assad, can take place with foreign, and not just Russian, troops in the country.
the point being that assad will not be permitted to run in the election.
cause it's only democracy if our guy wins…..
Of course it is a hollow concession as there is no real opposition. The collection of émigré personalities that Hillary collected a while ago, and "recognized' by US — would not get a single vote in Syria. The real and only opposition in Syria is a loyal opposition, that is they support Assad and Army while fighting for their country. They are significant in a sense that they represent a great deal of Sunni population, and Sunni young men are still the majority of Assad's army, the fact nicely covered up by our war propaganda media. Free Syrian Army is an umbrella name comprising of about 3,000 factions, and each faction very, very small. They are also Islamists, but wanted this designation in order to get arms, salary, and funding for war, as well as the political protection in the West. At the very beginning, there were some soldiers from Assad's army that deserted, and hence the name "Free" Syrian Army. But the commander of those actually negotiated with Assad allowing them all to return without consequences. That was a big story few years back. And these that call themselves Free Syrian Army and are in fact Islamists, they have a bloody trail of crimes committed against civilians. As for Al-Nusra, their track record is clear. Many, many crimes against civilians were committed long before ISIS came on the scene as the strongest. There is literally nobody on the ground that is not on camera and on record displaying the crimes they committed against civilians, including babies and pregnant women. I just dare any officialdom and media to point out to ONE group, sub-group or individual today fighting against "Assad" that have not committed crimes.
As our press and officials are usually quick to cry crocodile tears when it comes to real or imagined crimes against civilians when it is CONVENIENT and politically EXPEDIENT. But have hearts of stone when it comes to the victims of their protégés. Unfortunately for them, others in the region have the documentation and are collecting it — and Russia and its allies have been doing it for years Does anyone believe that China is sitting on its hands waiting for the well organized and well funded ISIS shows up on its soil, and stirs up, radicalizes and whips up into obedience its Moslem population? ISIS has shown up in Libya, in Yemen, in Afghanistan — and always without fail in support of US geopolitical goals. Examples abound. In Libya, they are attacking the government in Tripoli, preventing it to push US supported government in Tobruz. In Yemen, it had to come against Houthis, of course. In Afghanistan, it is attacking into submission those Taliban tribes that are FOR the peace deal with Kabul, and financing those that are against. It is getting all clearer, and if Saudi Arabia wants to fall on the sward, so be it. Kingdom is in trouble as it is — its succession intrigues have not been done yet.