Author`s name Dmitry Sudakov

Geneva-2 started, Geneva-3, Geneva-4, etc. to follow

Geneva-2 conference opened after another portion of propaganda to reveal "atrocities" of the Syrian army and incomprehensible mess with an invitation to Iran that had offered the best way out of the conflict. The constant support of the West to Saudi Wahhabi fighters and opposition behind them can only be explained with the fact that they inhibit the influence of Iran and Russia in the Middle East.

The conference on the peaceful settlement of the Syrian conflict began on January 22 in Montreux, Switzerland. According to organizers, the main purpose of the conference is to convince the parties to cease the armed conflict and establish a transitional government endowed with full executive powers.

"Too bad Iran is not present at the conference. Its presence is necessary in every sense," Russian Arabist and Islamic scholar Pavel Gusterin told Pravda.Ru. "Iran has close direct contacts with the government of Bashar al-Assad, and these contacts exist to provide assistance in the fight against international terrorism," he added.

According to the expert, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon withdrew the invitation from Iran, after the United States put direct pressure on the official. Moreover, it is not the first time when Ban Ki-moon changes his mind at the last moment, which does not contribute to his reputation as a politician.

Another expert, the head of the department of the Iranian Institute of Oriental Studies, Nina Mamedova, believes that the withdrawal of Iran marked a defeat of both Russian, Iranian and UN diplomacy.

"I think this is a failure in diplomacy, because one should have coordinated every little detail of Iran's presence at the conference. The fact that Iran was suspended from the conference means a failure in the diplomatic mission of the United Nations, as well as a loss for the entire system of negotiations on Syria. This is also a big blow for the Russian and Iranian diplomacy that made ​​everything possible to have Iran at the conference, because the country plays a significant role in Syria," the expert told Pravda.Ru.

However, whether Iran is in or out, no one expects that the conference will end with a breakthrough result on the declared agenda: opposition is represented fragmentarily. The so-called National Coalition of Syrian Opposition and Revolutionary Forces is not a consolidated force.

"Now the opposition is splitting, and this split casts doubts on the peace process. Negotiating with consolidated and unified opposition is one thing, and engaging in a dialogue with disparate groups that allegedly joined the coalition is another thing," Pavel Gusterin said. "My prediction - most likely, a peaceful settlement in Syria will be lost in words at this conference. There will be no specific results reached. That will not happen, they will demand Bashar al-Assad should be removed from the political arena, to which neither Russia nor China will agree. Assad himself said that he would run for the next term. He has the right to hold on to power as a legitimately elected president. For him, it's like riding a bicycle: if you stop, you fall down. It is possible that he will leave Syria. But where will he go? Iran? Maybe, but this option is vague, so it is better for him to fight till the end. He has the support in the face of Russia and China. Based on this, I do not exclude that there will be Geneva-3 and Geneva-4," said Pavel Gusterin.

Nina Mamedova does not believe in a practical result of the conference either.

"Here, I am more pessimistic than optimistic. I think that at this stage contradictions are very sharp. The variant proposed by Iran, namely, the election of a new president, would be the most legitimate way out of the situation. Perhaps, the international community can persuade the opposition to agree to that, instead of coups," she told Pravda.Ru.

Oddly enough, the expert believes, Iran's absence from the conference will only improve the situation. "We can assume that Iran's participation would inhibit the opposition and, on the contrary, make the opposition set forth unrealistic demands, especially about the toppling of the Syrian president. Therefore, it is possible that this whole situation will make the opposition more loyal and more pragmatic for the talks. Possibly, it would give the peace process a go, which is the most important thing," Nina Mamedova said.

This is only an assumption, the most favorable outcome. The information warfare suggests that it is unlikely to occur.

On the eve of the conference, theatrical performances and forged photo images were used as a propaganda weapon. The Guardian newspaper published a report prepared by the "team of world-famous forensic experts," based on 55,000 (!) photos of corpses of alleged victims of Syrian torture chambers. All those photos were supposedly taken and smuggled by one (!) fugitive former police photographer codenamed Caesar.

Reuters, on its part, was tirelessly broadcasting staged scenes of the results of alleged air strikes of Assad's government forces in the suburbs of Damascus. The photos had been fabricated so clumsily that they raised many eyebrows. At any rate, no one believes them, judging by the comments in The Guardian. The slogan of "Assad is killing his people" (the Sunnis as the ethnic majority) is utterly false. Let's take an example of the Syrian delegation at Geneva-2: all delegates, except for one, are Sunnis. Assad's wife is a Sunni, 60-70 percent of his army are Sunnis, most of his ministers are Sunnis, Assad's religious mentor was a Sunni (killed in a car explosion), the Grand Mufti of Syria, who supports Assad, is a Sunni (his son was killed by terrorists).

The direct support of the West for Saudi Wahhabi fighters and opposition behind them can only be explained with the fact that they inhibit the influence of Iran and Russia in the Middle East. The official opposition (appointed by the West) says a lot about its love for democracy, but in fact they use these words to impose its point of view on what kind of Islam everyone should believe to be correct.

The U.S. State Department has a simple approach to information warfare. They arrange provocations, then start a controversy and try to achieve the desired goal, whether it goes about intervention or the dismissal of Bashar Assad. When it becomes known that it was a fake, as it happened in the story of who orchestrated the chemical attacks on August 21 in the suburbs of Damascus, they do not even think to apologize.

Lyuba Lulko


Read the original in Russian