Dotting the I’S & Crossing the T’S
What did Putin tell Obama about Syria?
Written by Nasser Kandil,
The observer of the variables which started in developing in the region feels that the attitudes of the active and the serious international regional powers that are related to the Iranian nuclear program and the war against terrorism become a platform and an occasion for exchanging the messages about Syria more than what is related to the two files which the international major powers especially Russia and America have spent enough talks to draw a clear vision about their tracks. After the growing phenomenon of terrorism had reached the red line, the conviction has played a boiling point which did not tolerate a decisive role in neglecting the luxury of variations and postponing, away from the responsibilities of making this terrorism and using it and betting on it according to wrong considerations, and where the starting point in creating a regional environment that is suitable for developing the conditions of winning in this war is to accelerate in completing the nuclear understanding with Iran and to open the door for reconciliations and cooperation between the two parties of confrontation which allied with both Washington and Moscow.
The observer’s notice is attracted to the strange media speech which belonged to the campaign of Washington’s allies about this great transformation, it seemed the media means which belong to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, Jordan , and even Egypt as if they are at the peak of the war against Syria and with the same slogans of the first days of war and with the same type of bets, which suggest that those allies are out of the needed changes and this is what the speech of the Russia President Putin who carries out managing the special arrangements of the needed shifts of these changes is denying. In other words, the intended speech is what the President Vladimir Putin has insisted on when he talked to the Syrian Minister of Foreign Affairs Walid Al-Moualem in front of the TV cameras about the opportunity of forming a regional alliance that combines Syria with its opponents in the war against terrorism, confirming the presence of enough indicators for Russia about the awareness of the involved countries in this ally of the magnitude of terrorism and the degree of its threat to its security, stability and the impossibility to confront it without a cooperation and coordination with Syria, and forgetting the past slogan which calls for overthrowing or abandoning the Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad about whom Putin said clearly that he is the ally of Russia, and that Russia will not abandon him since he represents his people according to the democratic, legitimate, and constitutional standards.
The schizophrenia between politics and media suggests to the observer that he is in front of a train that its trailer has dissociated from its engine so the trailer has turned towards new track, while the engine out of the force of rush continues its track on the old railroad, this applies on the schizophrenia between the American practical diplomatic performance and the media performance for its most prominent symbols including the President Barak Obama and the Secretary of State John Kerry, where it is useful that the declarations of Obama and Kerry have not resembled their attempts and their actual commitments towards the Iranian nuclear program, the war against terrorism, and the attitude towards Syria and its president. So the senior Russian officials ensure that Washington, Riyadh, Doha, and Oman and to some extent Ankara have almost admitted of the nuclear understanding with Iran as a ruling title for the coming stage, and that the President Al-Assad is the next title of Syria in its war against terrorism, furthermore, the Russian officials have surprised that the leaders of these countries did not tell each other of changing their attitudes, although they disclosed Moscow, and that each one of them has explained the insistence of his reverse media attitudes according to what has been agreed with Moscow by the attempt of appeasing who are supposed to be allies, and still adhere their strict attitudes, thus they must have time for accepting the change as inevitable choice.
All the assumptions about the failure of the nuclear negotiations are a media plan for addressing the Western public opinion and preparing it to accept the understanding, and all the attempts of evoking the threats of failure against ISIS and despite that it adheres the talk about a moderate opposition is not available, and an attempt for preparing it to accept the change by saying later that there is no alternative for a cooperation with the Syrian President as well as there is no alternative for the nuclear understanding which means that the completion of the announcement of the nuclear understanding will be the starting whistle towards the change in the policies and the attitudes towards Syria.
A good example is the speech of Mikhail Bogdanov the Russian Deputy Foreign Minister after his meeting with his counterpart who is responsible for the Middle East issue, and the American Deputy Secretary of State about the common conviction that there is no alternative for the President Al Assad for the one who does not want to see in Syria another Libya and another Somalia, by contrast the imaginary of the speech of the President Obama of his adherence the moderate opposition, this description is registered in the name of Obama as a receipt for turning Syria into another Libya and Somalia, and as the speech of Obama for Benjamin Netanyahu “ we have tried to get guarantees from Iran for non – possessing a bomb and change its policy towards you, but we have failed and we have to choose between losing two bitter things or gaining at least one of them, and the attitudes of Israel which call for refusing the agreement with Iran is a receipt to enable it to possess a bomb”.
The call of the President Putin with the President Obama and their talk about the nuclear understanding but in particular about Syria has one task according to wide acquainted resources that it is the time for change and there is no longer for what permits the luxury of declarations that belong to the past, and the background is suitable to go forward politically and the field will bring surprises that make promoting the change as an expression of a conviction and a choice as a kind of luxury. What is needed is a new speech that makes the agreements towards Syria under light, and paves the way for change. Washington is invited to help its allies which are ready to change and make it come down from a tree, and not to invoke it as a reason for escalation, it is a suitable time as long as the stopwatch is with Moscow.
Translated by Lina Shehadeh,
2015-07-09 | عدد القراءات 1769
