Aggression between Motives and Results

The continued decline of the role of armed action in the country, since the battle of Aleppo, up to untying the knot of Ghouta; the steadfastness of the political solution option with continuation of its tracks in Geneva, Sochi and Astana despite the attempts of obstructionism here and there; the innovative solutions provided by the Russian side in the face of each delaying; the increasing of weight and role of the serious national opposition forces; and the steady possibility of pushing the political process forward to exit from the US strategy of «perpetuating the conflict» – all these developments made it possible to place the US, and generally the Western, player outside the Syrian field. Therefore, Washington resorted to intervene with its direct military weight, to shuffle cards again, within attempts to re-control the situation.

On the other hand, as is well known, the Syrian crisis has become, objectively, a part of an international conflict whose features and tendencies are becoming increasingly clear, day after day. After each clash, the role of the rising international powers is strengthened further, and the US decline is confirmed as a matter of fact. Moreover, this decline is confirmed as the one and only choice, due to the greatest capitalist crisis. The new Western aggression came within the desperate attempts to avenge the rising international powers, to turn the clock back, and to prevent the progress of this necessary and objective process. The aggression, however – whether in its direct military consequences or pretexts tried to justify it – has more clearly reflected the truth of the decline. This is reflected in the contradictory positions of the US administration, and the level of vulgarity, superficiality, and departure from tact and diplomatic traditions, as was characteristically evident in the propaganda campaign; the statements of the representatives of the tripartite aggression states; the alerting and mobilizing of all followers and agents; anticipating the arrival of representatives of the OPCW Fact-Finding Mission, without waiting for impartial and transparent international investigation, contrary to international law and the Charter of the United Nations.

Despite the importance of the military response to the aggression and the interception of dozens of the aggressors' missiles, and the failure in achieving their objectives, but that does not dispense with the need to complete the response, on various tracks, including, first and foremost, the path of political solution on the basis of UNSC resolution 2254, being the most painful response to the coalition forces of aggression. Such a solution, not only bridges the cracks left by the crisis in the Syrian state and society, but also sets the basis to deter any subsequent future attempt the forces of Western aggression might resort to, in the course of their seeking to perpetuate the conflict. The original solution to the Syrian crisis is the political solution in parallel and integration with the war on terrorism, whether it is the terrorism of Daesh and Al-Nusra Front, or the international terrorism, which the latest aggression being one of its manifestations.

In short, Washington's attempt to regain its eroded role in Syria through this aggression has failed, and the attempts of USA to invest in the Syrian crisis to regain its global role, and monopolize the international decision, and embarrass the rising international powers, have also failed. In fact, the initial results of the aggression indicate the exact opposite of the aggressors' wishes.

Kassioun Editorial, Issue No 858, Apr. 16, 2018