Written by Nasser Kandil,
Leaning towards politics on the basis of the bets on fields or arenas of confrontation usually cannot be achieved through the science of war and politics, but only through achieving the opposed steps in the field, either militarily, politically, or popularly towards a step that none of the parties has the margins of maneuver for it, thus the only available step for each one of them is the direct open confrontation by announcing the cessation of the cold war or the vicarious war or the indirect war, and the transition from scoring points which became impossible into what the experts have called” bending the arm then breaking the bone”. When resorting to scoring points and to cold war or indirect war become a result of the avoidance of the direct and the hot confrontation, then the only mandatory way becomes the starting of politics.
Internationally, the matters have developed quickly under the influence of the military Russian presence in Syria, and under a clear title; a new methodology of war against terrorism that translates what Russia has repeated frequently, it is based on refusing the use of the concept of countering terrorism to violate the sovereignty of the countries, and ensuring the need for a regional international alliance that includes Syria, Iraq, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Iran, Russia, and the United States. This concept has constituted the basis of the behavior of the Russian President Vladimir Putin towards each one of Saudi Arabia and Egypt, and which was followed by Moscow Declaration by its spokesman Putin himself; that Russia has delayed a lot in its duty to participate directly in the war against terrorism, hoping to reach a form under the United Nations’ umbrella that includes all the involvers and who are interested, since that it is asked not to be sufficient of its initial attitude, but on the contrary to translate it by supporting whom fighting the terrorism according to the principles in which Moscow believes, thus in order to move towards an active partnership in this war. From this point the facts and the events have happened consecutively that led to the active Russian movement through the military presence in Syria, this cannot be isolated from Moscow's reading for the entire balances of the war against Syria in addition to the political solution, its complexities and what it included. The Russian reaction was opposed by a harsh American objection movement and Russian responses, and responses to the responses till we reach the peak of escalation and got to the point of parity. Thus the matter has ended with an American demand to call for a collective effort to confront the terrorism, this is the original demand of Russia, but its essence starts from the cooperation with the Syrian country, its army and its president, therefore the politics starts from here.
In a parallel track the issue of the Syrian immigrants has developed in an remarkable quickness, through the media accompanying it, the dramatic dimension of the human side of it, and the European response by opening the doors in front of the immigrants towards presenting the origin of this issue. How Syria will regain its stability? So their sons will return back to it, and the fears will free themselves from the phobia of the demographic change, the spread of terrorism, the social and the economic pressures. There are two ways in today’s equation either a war resolution to occupy Syria and overthrow the country, its army, and its president on the basis of the hostile attitudes which held by the leaders of the West, and the inability to go to war, however the West has tried this under Syrian chemical title, it has brought its fleets and then retreated, it is a war that does not have an answer of how to avoid the repetition of the Iraqi experience concerning the opportunities of rooting the terrorism in exchange of the collective evasion of the Western countries and their allies from any ground fighting, in exchange of the admission that the ground war is the base, paying attention for the risk of the big explosion in case of war which will affect the nuclear understanding with Iran and will affect the security of Israel. So the only available alternative is to start the politics from the point of parity, its entry is the abandonment of the wooden language about the refusal of the cooperation with the Syrian country, its army, and its president , therefore the Spanish Minister of the Foreign Affairs initiated the speech and followed by his Austrian colleague and up to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Britain as a start for an Atlantic tuning, with the title of “ The cooperation with Al-Assad”.
Regionally, the Saudi Iranian relationship is occupying a central position in making the scene; Yemen is constituting an arena for scoring mutual points, the politics has disrupted because the Saudi consideration of the ability of achieving points has started from reading the presence of an open Yemeni geography in front of the forces of Gulf towards Sanaa, which were followed by the calls for surrender of Iran’s allies. The developments have accelerated to say that the geography is planted with thorns that bleed, where dozens of the Gulf military soldiers have fallen, so this reveals what will be the situation for the coming months without existing a horizon of changing this track, so either a big and comprehensive military involvement that its consequences are not guaranteed or the politics must start before the bad Turkish news will occur in succession about the starting of the exist of the regional theatre after the coming elections within less than two months, this was according to the advice of the President Barack Obama to the King Salman Bin Abdul Aziz. Today the politics has one title it is Masqat not Doha even if Qatar has conciliated Saudi Arabia by sending one thousands soldiers to fight in Yemen.
In Lebanon, with reference to the competition between the presidential choices and the competition between dialogue's table and the arena of uprising, the high bets started to decrease , for example regarding the presidential aspect, the dialogue and its acceptance have constituted the announcement of the admission of the impossibility of appropriation and the bet on the balances of powers to impose the choices, so neither the nomination of the General Michel Aoun or his central rank in making the illustrious president are made spontaneously by the victories of Hezbollah in the fields of war, or the regional variables for the post stage of the nuclear understanding without communicating with the other party, nor the bet on penetrating the allies of the General Aoun to isolate him was useful. The dialogue becomes a translation of a mutual admission of the centrality of the role of the General Aoun that meets the centrality of the Al-Mostaqbal Movement's satisfaction, and the centrality of the mediation of the president of the house of representatives Nabih Berri. On the other hand, the dialogue appeared despite its independent track which stemmed from the political deadlock as a response for the pressure of the public anger and the fear of an explosion that might be done by unknown and that will drive the country towards chaos and the entry of new players from out of the range of control. The ratio of the popular zeal has declined comparing to the crowd which was about approximately half of the participants in the latest demonstration on the last Saturday in the last August, therefore the division among the activists was shown in reading goals and tactics, as their feeling of the nonsense of the policy of deliberate collision, so as a result it led to the disentanglement of people of the uprising. Therefore, the presidential parity and the parity between the dialogue and the uprising has taken place in order to start the politics.
Translated by Lina Shehadeh,
2015-09-11 | عدد القراءات 2136
