After the first round of “Syrian” peace talks in Geneva amounted to just the United States and Russia, the much-vaunted Geneva II looks like it will be similarly sparsely attended, with Lebanon seen as extremely unlikely to send representatives.
Officials familiar with the situation say UN Special envoy Lakhdar Brahimi has invited Lebanon, and intense conversations are underway between President Suleiman and Prime Minister Mikati for a “diplomatic way” to say no.
Saudi Arabia hasn’t even been invited yet, with Russia still concerned about their overt support for Islamist rebels, but they seem to be in the same boat, having warned Brahimi against inviting them, telling him he needs permission before extending the invite to Saudi officials.
Russia’s qualms about Saudi Arabia and America’s qualms about Iran mean neither is liable to turn up, and none of the Syrian rebel factions have agreed to participate either, with several openly spurning the idea of peace. The Assad government seems to have been convinced to participate, but they say they aren’t holding out much hope for a deal, and that seems a reasonable assessment given how hard it is to get anybody to show up at the talks.
Why should foreign nations "participate" in a conference supposedly designed to resolve differences between and among Syrians? Such foreign nations might conceivably attend such a conference as observers or mediators, but what standing can they legitimately claim to speak on behalf of 22 million Syrian citizens affected by the warfare in their country? If these foreign nations had any serious interest in the Syrian people, they would not be talking about what nations should or should not be involved in the conference; but rather would be focusing on facilitating discussions between and among the various Syrian disputants (the Syrian government, Syrians supporting the government, and Syrians opposing the government). And just has foreign governments have no place in such a conference, foreign groups and individuals likewise have no legitimate place there.
Why would the Geneva Convention invite "Illegal Immigrants" to peace talks who is trying to overthrow the government of a sovereign nation? (wonder why the US is not using their favorite word "Illegal Immigrants" to describe the rebels in Syria)
As the battle encompasses all of the Middle-East and North Africa, as Western powers think that their military base called Israel is not enough and now strive to expand into Syria, which would force the Russian base with its war ships to close down, surely those "illegal Immigrants" do have a vested interest they being native to the reign.
"Vested Interest" not sure which side you are on, but I could make the same argument that Mexico is native to America, does that give them the right to invade?