Thread: Western nations want "democracy" in Syria so badly

Originally Posted by sabang

Which begs the question, why then are western governments preventing expat Syrians from voting in the Syrian Presidential election? Seems they know better than to believe their own propaganda. I don't know exactly why you apparently prefer an Islamist, Al Qaeda type gov't in Syria as opposed to the secular Baathist regime in place now, but they would have no more chance of victory than a Kurdish party running a candidate (actually I think there is one). Like it or lump it, there is no viable electoral alternative to the current Baathist regime lead by Assad the Optometrist and his Morgan Stanley investment banker wife.

It is not what I prefer but the majority of the countries citizens prefer. If they all vote for Al Qaeda then so be it. It is their choice and the consequences of their choice will be on them also. As long as their elected representatives do not interfere in other democratic countries so be it.

^ Well, they don't- just look at the failed rebellion (and who can blame them?). The Kurds ended up siding with the government, the 'mild' Sunni rebels gave up the ghost and abandoned in droves when they realised who they were allied with, and what was left was militias of vile Islamists like AQ & Isil, comprised mainly of foreign mercenaries- the rump of whom are holed up in Idlib now, under Turkish & US protection.

Russia Pushes a Dangerous Narrative Ahead of Syria’s Sham Election



Moscow would have the world believe that the best route to stability is legitimizing a dictator who plunged his country into war and destabilized the entire Middle East.[COLOR=rgba(28,28,28,var(--text-opacity))]Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad is all but guaranteed a victory in an election scheduled for May 26, a sham no serious observer considers free and fair. As this latest chapter of the Syrian decade-long tragedy continues to unfold, Russia, a chief Assad supporter, is using the election to promote its own broader narrative and build influence.[/COLOR]
How Russia Is Using the Election to Its Advantage

[COLOR=rgba(28,28,28,var(--text-opacity))]The Russian foreign affairs ministry decried the “alleged illegitimacy” of the election as interference in Syria’s internal affairs. “No one has the right to tell the Syrians when and under what conditions they should elect their head of state,” said the ministry’s statement. Then it proceeded to denounce the “illegal foreign occupation” of Syrian territory, implicitly referring to the US. Russian officials have made it clear over the years the Kremlin wants the small remaining American contingent to leave Syria. They remain committed to this goal.[/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(28,28,28,var(--text-opacity))]Russia’s Kommersant presented Russia as the voice of dispassionate reason which “calls for respect for the basic law of the [Syrian] republic,” rather than denounce the outcome of the election before it happens. To an uninformed audience this may sound sensible—and this is partly the point of Kremlin messaging—but the reality is another matter entirely.[/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(28,28,28,var(--text-opacity))]The UN Security Council Resolution 2254 outlines steps for a political transition for Syria. The resolution chartered a Syrian-led and UN-facilitated political process that established a transitional governing body, a new constitution agreed upon by the Syrian constitutional committee, and UN-supervised elections that meet “the highest international standards of transparency and accountability, with all Syrians, including members of the diaspora.” Nothing of the sort is taking place, which makes the upcoming election a cruel and predictable farce. To date, negotiations in Geneva failed to produce a new constitution as the Assad regime, shielded by Kremlin diplomacy, purposely stalled the discussions.[/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(28,28,28,var(--text-opacity))]It would be tempting to say that Moscow is simply rejecting the UN resolution it signed, but the reality is more nuanced. Rather, the Kremlin promotes a different interpretation of the UN resolution—it finds nothing that explicitly prohibits holding the elections now with the current Syrian constitution in place. In earlier years, Moscow diluted legal documents such as the 2012 Geneva communique, on which Resolution 2254 is based, precisely to leave these terms vague. Thus, Moscow not only supports Assad as a “legitimate” ruler of Syria but also erodes from within the spirit of international institutions that envisioned his eventual departure. In essence, this is the purpose of Russian diplomacy on Syria.[/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(28,28,28,var(--text-opacity))]In addition, as the Syrian election nears, Moscow renewed its longstanding claim that sanctions against Assad, and especially the so-called Caesar Act, hurt the Syrian people. This claim is part of the Kremlin’s narrative that portrays the West as aggressive and destabilizing, bent on ousting regimes it doesn’t like, as opposed to Russia that stands for respect of international law, anti-terrorism and Syrian sovereignty. The Caesar Act, named after a Syrian military defector who documented evidence of Assad’s war crimes, officially took force in July 2020. It sanctions governments, companies, and individuals indirectly funding Assad’s regime. The Syrian people are not the target, while the act does not hinder the provision of humanitarian aid to the Syrian people—rather Assad, with Moscow’s support is doing that.[/COLOR]
Russia’s Strategy

[COLOR=rgba(28,28,28,var(--text-opacity))]It is no accident Moscow is now focused on sanctions. Leveraging humanitarian assistance to support Assad is crucial to Moscow’s play. Just as Moscow blocked last year’s UN efforts to deliver cross-border humanitarian aid to Syria, it appears set to do the same this summer at the upcoming vote as it pushes for the aid to be delivered from Assad-controlled areas. Perhaps nothing highlights the Kremlin’s position as clearly as this month’s conversation with Vladimir Putin and UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. “When considering the humanitarian situation in Syria, concern was expressed over the tightening of unilateral sanctions against the legitimate authorities of the Syrian Arab Republic,” according to the Kremlin’s statement about the meeting.[/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(28,28,28,var(--text-opacity))]Indeed, to shift pressure away from Assad, the narrative that sanctions—rather than Assad—are suffocating the Syrian people has resurfaced in the Russian state-controlled press in the context of the Syrian election. In a recent interview, Russian foreign affairs minister Sergei Lavrov said the West aims to “suffocate the Syrian people so that they stand up and overthrow Syrian president Bashar Assad,” echoing earlier comments published in Russia’s Izvestiya by the Syrian ambassador to Russia Riad Haddad, “they do everything they can do suffocate us.” Moreover, the argument that sanctions against Assad are ineffective or harm the civilian population has taken hold in the West, showing that it is not immune to Kremlin narratives. The Middle East region too has shifted towards the Kremlin position as the Arab League moves closer to accepting Assad, something Lavrov has not failed to highlight. “[M]any Arab countries are realizing the importance of restoring ties with Damascus. For our part, we fully support this readiness,” he told Egypt’s Al-Ahram last month.[/COLOR]
[COLOR=rgba(28,28,28,var(--text-opacity))]In this context there is a hint of indifference to the West in Russian press comments. One Russian analyst quoted by state-run RIA Novosti said that even if the West does not accept the Syrian election as legitimate it will still have to deal with Assad. In a similar vein, Vitaly Naumkin, director of the Institute of Oriental Studies told a Kommersant reporter in the article cited earlier, “There is no tragedy that the West does not recognize the [Syrian] elections. Obviously, Assad will win. But there are sane people in the West who understand that the idea of postponement [of elections] is absurd, since in that case anarchy and chaos will ensue.”[/COLOR]
A Sad Past, Present, and Future

[COLOR=rgba(28,28,28,var(--text-opacity))]It’s hard to see how legitimizing a man who spared no depravity to cling to power and plunged his country into a war that destabilized the entire region will bring stability. Moreover, Western non-recognition of Syria’s “election” matters as does its commitment to Syria and more broadly the global order that the Kremlin seeks to erode—an order that says there are limits to what a state can do to its citizens. It also matters that while the true scope of Syria’s horrors has largely gone unnoticed by the Russian public, a group of Russian human rights groups recently unveiled a report, the first of its kind, that describes Russia as a perceived gross violator of humanitarian law in Syria, not a liberator. The Kremlin made many serious gains in its great power contest with the West as a result of Vladimir Putin’s intervention to save Assad. But the story of Russia’s Syria adventure is not over, and the US role remains crucial.[/COLOR]
Anna Borshchevskaya is a senior fellow at The Washington Institute and author of the upcoming book Putin’s War in Syria: Russian Foreign Policy and the Price of America’s Absence. This article was originally published on the 19FortyFive website.

https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/...-sham-election

Lebanese attack Syrians heading to vote at their Embassy...

Read more at:



http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/82801594.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medi um=text&utm_campaign=cppst

The 'West', sabang?

Originally Posted by sabang

why then are western governments preventing expat Syrians from voting in the Syrian Presidential election?

Woooh, double edged propaganda- against both Putins Russia and Assads Syria! Sorry 'bout the Butthurt uncle sam, but your vile Islamist mates lost the rebellion remember? No amount of propaganda changes that, and preventing Syrians from voting in the election rather exposes the threadbare paucity of your 'democratic ideals'.

But of course we know your reasons for wanting the Assad regime overthrown have absolutely nothing to do with Democracy anyway, and never did. Save that for the numpties.

^ Sure, some Arab nations too. Sunni, obviously. They would wanna be careful in Leb though- Hezbollah, remember?

Originally Posted by sabang

^ Sure, some Arab nations too. Sunni, obviously. They would wanna be careful in Leb though- Hezbollah, remember?

Just pointing out that it isn't simply 'the west', mate. Far too many noses in this one big pie . . . and it doesn't even have oil. A clusterfuck of epic proportions unleashed by the US invasion of Iraq . . . dominoes.

Still, it's difficult to feel sorry for murderers like Assad and Sadaam . . .

Originally Posted by panama hat

Just pointing out that it isn't simply 'the west', mate.

Always worth remembering, particularly with posters around who use not so much a 'broad brush', more like a broom.

And please, do not forget on White Helmets that told us about the Assad's chemical crimes...

Some non-MSM media now report about ongoing investigation around all those WH activities.

Who would believe that the founder of Mayday Rescue Foundation - sponsor of White Helmets - James le Mesurier, accused of misuse and corruption of the funds, had finally confessed to it.

Unfortunately, 3 days afterwards he was found under his balcony in Istanbul...

Originally Posted by Hugh Cow

Speaking of the UN. A good friend of mine who worked for the UN told me that the motto of the UN food and agricultural organisation (UNFAO) is Fiat Panis (let there be bread) but the UN staff called it Fat Penis because it fucked everything it touched.



Quite right. Legitimate Govts are is based on the will of the majority of the people usually in fair and free elections without coercion or intimidation.

BTW your childish attempt at sarcasm (and your fascination with excrement) only diminishes further your err... rather unenviable reputation.

I can pull up polls from Western polling agencies that show Putin or Assad would win their elections. But you'll find a way to backtrack...

Originally Posted by Hugh Cow

It is not what I prefer but the majority of the countries citizens prefer. If they all vote for Al Qaeda then so be it. It is their choice and the consequences of their choice will be on them also. As long as their elected representatives do not interfere in other democratic countries so be it.

They won't vote for al Qaeda. They'd vote for Assad

Political stability is the goal to which all nations aspire. Those who have had it for sustained periods often forget that what is taken for granted in countries like the United States, is a precious gift to those in countries like Syria.

the history of Syria between 1946 and 1970 was one where political turbulence and civil strife was the rule, broken up by exceptional periods of peace that were hardly stable. Syria became fully independent of French mandate rule in 1946. Three coups of 1949 were followed by another in 1954. Of the new Arab states formed from former British and French mandates, Syria was in many respects, the least stable.

Hafez al-Assad ruled Syria from 1970 until his death in the year 2000. Whilst the Syrian military participated in the Arab-Israeli War of 1973 and engaged in longstanding interventions in the Lebanese Civil War, internally Syria became increasingly stable. If the story of Syrian history from 1946-1970 was one of continual instability, the story of Syria from 1970 till 2011 tells the opposite tale.

Originally Posted by Backspin

I can pull up polls from Western polling agencies that show Putin or Assad would win their elections.

It never can be such fair election like (please no names here)

Especially when they do not hold some pre-election shows - at least for 2 years, just the war (7 years?)
(but perhaps such war can say to the population much more than a 2-y comedy...)

So Russia, who support the Alawite dictator who - as his father did before him - fixes elections and slaughters those who oppose him, reckon the West doesn't want democracy in Syria?

Do you reckon Hoohoo knows how fucking stupid he sounds?

The West (well, USA) wants obeisance in Syria. Democracy has nowt to do with it.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Do you reckon Hoohoo knows how fucking stupid he sounds?

Surely he can't.

But once he gets his teeth locked onto some item of the endless bs he copy pastes, then those gnashers aint unlocking for nobody.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Do you reckon Hoohoo knows how fucking stupid he sounds?

Surely he does . . . but his masters won't let him off the hook - probably has family back in the PRC

Originally Posted by cyrille

Surely he can't.

But once he gets his teeth locked onto some item of the endless bs he copy pastes, then those gnashers aint unlocking for nobody.

Some ppl try to have real debates and in real debates , you bring evidence to support your case. You've never copy and pasted anything because you seen to be incapable of having a real debate.

You're a complete waste of time discussing anything with. A complete idiot. You think you're discussing things with people but all they're doing is marvelling at how utterly ridiculous you are.

Has anyone replied to anything you've posted on this thread?

You're like a budgie chirping away while humans communicate.

Originally Posted by Backspin

Some ppl try to have real debates and in real debates

. . . this leaves you out.

Hand on heart, Skidmark, do you really believe that your incessant doubling-up on lies like SA not being part oft he Asian Continent, Nazis being Socialists, the EU breaking WHO guidelines with the PIs and a thousand other instances in any way contributes to a debate??? When you're wrong, shown to be wrong, proven to be wrong just accept it and move on.

cyrille, using him as an example as the previous poster, has corrected some on several occasions. Did I go a frantic hunt for crap to justify my mistake? Did I obfuscate and go off on tangents etc etc etc? Na. You know why? Because it's no big deal.

No idea what made you become like this, afraid to admit when you're wrong . . . but you should grow out of it, you're 37 years old.

Originally Posted by panama hat

. . . this leaves you out.

Hand on heart, Skidmark, do you really believe that your incessant doubling-up on lies like SA not being part oft he Asian Continent, Nazis being Socialists, the EU breaking WHO guidelines with the PIs and a thousand other instances in any way contributes to a debate??? When you're wrong, shown to be wrong, proven to be wrong just accept it and move on.

cyrille, using him as an example as the previous poster, has corrected some on several occasions. Did I go a frantic hunt for crap to justify my mistake? Did I obfuscate and go off on tangents etc etc etc? Na. You know why? Because it's no big deal.

No idea what made you become like this, afraid to admit when you're wrong . . . but you should grow out of it, you're 37 years old.

Despite our football disagreements, Cy and I tend to agree, and he's on the money here with his original comment.

I would only argue that Klongdick and Ohno are equally as reprehensible- but for different reasons.

Originally Posted by hallelujah

Despite our football disagreements, Cy and I tend to agree, and he's on the money here with his original comment.

I would only argue that Klongdick and Ohno are equally as reprehensible- but for different reasons.

??? Please explain it once again in plain English, and very simple, you know about my poor English.

Are we here still on the Syrian thread?

Originally Posted by Klondyke

Please explain it once again

No. Nyet.

Originally Posted by sabang

The West (well, USA) wants obeisance in Syria. Democracy has nowt to do with it.

The West would like the majority Sunni population of Syria to run their own country, because they are not terrorist supporters like the Shi'a c u n t s, you poorly educated dolt.

Originally Posted by cyrille

You're a complete waste of time discussing anything with. A complete idiot. You think you're discussing things with people but all they're doing is marvelling at how utterly ridiculous you are.

Spot on!