Geneva II talks: A test for diplomacy

The Geneva II talks on the crisis in Syria, caused by the west and its Middle Eastern minions playing political games by arming and financing terrorist groups to spread chaos, will provide a telling test as to the state of international diplomacy and will serve as an indicator as to whether Washington uses diplomacy or blackmail to underpin its foreign policy.

Geneva II talks: A test for diplomacy. 51902.jpeg

The bottom line of the page entitled "Syria Crisis" is that without support from abroad, namely the west, more specifically NATO and more particularly the FUKUS Axis (France-UK-US), aided by the ever-willing Gulf Cooperation Council constituted by Saudi Arabia and Qatar (and to a lesser extent the United Arab Emirates), the Syrian crisis would not exist.

Without aid, support, financing, weapons and training from abroad, the bands of terrorists committing murder, torture, rape, desecration of bodies, decapitating children, slicing the breasts off women, roasting people alive in ovens, cutting off ears and noses, impaling children on poles, raping young girls before or after they are beheaded, playing soccer with the heads of victims, all of this very well documented for the disbelievers, would not exist.

Why nobody in the international media has asked the question who is responsible for this, where is the accountability and who is going to be prosecuted for intervention in the internal affairs of a sovereign state, is obvious. The same answer would arise from the question what happened to those who entered Iraq without a casus belli and wrecked the country and its society? The same again from the illegal attack against Libya, another State destroyed and left destitute by NATO imperialist warmongers.

As the Geneva II talks on Syria draw nearer, the United States of America seems to be adopting a position, predictably with strings attached, namely that the conference serves to rubber-stamp a post-Assad Syria, in which all parties must agree to a solution excluding the current President (Bashar al-Assad). Needless to say, if that is the position of Washington, it will be obediently repeated by London and Paris.

Is this diplomacy? Surely the talks should include all Syrian parties to the conflict, excluding the foreign-backed terrorist forces and logically, also excluding the foreign countries sponsoring terrorism inside Syria, surely the talks should be a platform for the Syrians themselves to discuss the way forward and surely this must be a question for the Syrian people themselves to resolve. If the majority want Bashar al-Assad as their President, then logic dictates he should remain. Or are the USA and its allies planning to invite al-Qaeda along to Geneva?

So who is John Kerry, who is Barack Obama, who is the United States of America and its poodles in Europe and the Middle East to dictate over the will of the Syrian people who should be their (Syrian) ruler? Following Wasgington's logic, perhaps the UNO should place President Putin as the President of the United States, surely his popularity rating there would be higher than Obama's. The difference is that President Putin fights terrorists, he does not support, aid, finance and equip them.

Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey
Pravda.Ru