Last Friday, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted resolution 2585 on delivering humanitarian aid cross-border and cross-line. Kassioun had noted in the last issue’s editorial, prior to the resolution, that “There is no doubt that among the Syrian, regional, and even international parties, there are those who are not at all pleased by the prospects of a Russian-American consensus, as this means getting closer to a solution and thus to change, and those rely on the fact that if a dispute occurs on this issue, it will allow for the creation of an atmosphere that undermines any consensus that took or will take place. This matter is far from reality”. That is exactly what happened.

On Friday, July 9, 2021, the UN Security Council adopted unanimously a resolution, UNSC Resolution 2585, on the delivery of humanitarian aid into Syria through border crossings and “to all parts of Syria without discrimination”.

On the tenth of this month, the UN Security Council members will discuss the extension of Resolution 2533 regarding the border crossings. In practice, the discussion will determine the fate of the remaining border crossing, which is Bab al-Hawa crossing.

The Russia-US June 16 summit has not yet revealed the detailed results with regard to Syria, except by talking about jointly searching to find a solution with regards to humanitarian issues, in addition to making it clear that there is joint work on the mechanism for implementing UNSC Resolution 2254. Despite this, the active movement that is taking place these days, and that will take place over the next few weeks with regard to Syria, clearly indicate that the summit itself triggered this activity.

The results of the Russian-American summit have not yet emerged, especially with regard to the Syria file. This is quite normal, as such a summit can only involve consensus in very general terms regarding the issues under discussion/negotiation.

It has been nearly five and a half years since the adoption of UNSC Resolution 2254 providing for a solution to the Syrian crisis. At that time, the resolution was adopted unanimously by the members of the UN Security Council, though it has yet to be implemented.

Talk about the Putin-Biden summit, which will be held on the 16th of this month in Geneva, occupies the top place in the various current political discussions. This is not surprising, especially when it comes to hot clashing points, as is the case in Syria.

Organized international aid for the «state» of the Zionist entity has diverse dimensions and forms, and it is difficult to enumerate them all. However, the connection is deep between the continuation of high-income levels and these flows: from charitable aid to government and military aid, all the way to the last phase in which the flow of foreign investment and corporate finance have become main and important factors. The entity’s economic stability is deeply contingent to the US financial system.

The narrow-mindedness of some suggests that merely ending foreign presence in Syria and unifying it geographically under one authority is sufficient for ensuring the continuation of its geopolitical presence and unity.

During the last four months, since the new administration took office, the US rhetoric has been characterized by an escalation in most major affairs in the international framework, especially those related to the conflict with Russia and China, whether through NATO or the many European files, including Ukraine and the gas pipeline dossiers, and others. This rhetoric is in essence a continuation of the US rhetoric during the Trump era, though some details might differ.