US SIDES WITH GULF REACTIONARIES TO OVERTHROW ASSAD

Posted on August 8, 2012 by

0


Yekaterina Kudashkina
STOP NATO

US sides with Gulf reactionaries to overthrow Assad

Interview with Gennady Yevstafyev, retired Lieutenant General of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service
AUDIO: Download >>

This is a challenge, this is an open outburst against the influence of China in the area. This is really an attempt to try to undermine Russian influence in the area. And moreover, after quite a short time we will see very serious events happening in Central Asia. If they succeed now here, then we will see not only Iran, but after Iran we will have increased, enhanced action in the Central Asia.

Votes in the General Assembly were bought by the Western countries, especially the US, Britain and sometimes France, with the promises of economic help, military equipment deliveries and any other kind of promises that could come to your mind.

After finishing with Egypt, Libya, they came to Syria. And to the astonishment of progressive mankind, so to say, the Americans make a deal in the name of democracy. Unbelievable! They make a deal with the most reactionary forces in the Arab world, the countries in which democracy is a curse word and is not practiced – with Saudi Arabia and some kingdoms of the Persian Gulf.

So, like we see among those countries which oppose all kind of military action to be formally approved of, in regards of Syria – we have Russia, we have Iran, we have China. India has been keeping a lower profile on those issues.

A non-aligned profile.

Yes, this is its common stance, I mean India is one of the leaders of the non-aligned movement. But anyway. Doesn’t that signify that perhaps those three major countries in the region, in the whole of Eurasia, are now opposed to something which is being presented as the mere issue of regime change in Syria? Doesn’t that imply that those countries are well aware of the real dimension of that issue?

First of all, it was quite evident right from the beginning that behind the so-called revolutionaries in Syria who are trying to overthrow Bashar Assad and bring changes into the composition of the Syrian political elite we would see American hands. These hands are covered with blood, there is no doubt. And an admission by Obama that he allows the supply of American military equipment to the fighters against Bashar Assad is really a politically motivated admission, forced admission, that they are behind this. But people in the area which is suffering from American intervention, they didn’t have any doubts about this.

Americans are choosing to do these things not by their own institutions very often, or by private paramilitary companies, but they always find some sort of allies. And in this sense they have identified Saudi Arabia and Turkey, especially Turkey as an adjacent country, as a country which is having some interest in changing the religious and political setup in Syria. And they are doing it through Turkey and Saudi Arabia – they give money, they give equipment, they give armaments. And these countries are supporting the fighters – the Mujahidins – as they call them. And of course this is an open political challenge to the major players in the area because this is an attempt to change the balance of forces in the area.

And if they are succeeding in Syria, then next year, I think in the spring, we will see the growing tension around Iran because the next target would be Iran. And it is a preparation for Iranian attack. Of course we have Israel which is demanding actions, but Israel is playing with fire. I’m looking at Israel with disbelief because Jews are very clever people and it is very strange to see them playing with fire and not trying to find some sort of a negotiated solution.

And this is a challenge, this is an open outburst against the influence of China in the area. This is really an attempt to try to undermine Russian influence in the area. And moreover, after quite a short time we will see very serious events happening in Central Asia. If they succeed now here, then we will see not only Iran, but after Iran we will have increased, enhanced action in the Central Asia. As they call it, the domino will shatter and then will come down.

Sir, so then isn’t it surprising that 130 voted in favour of that resolution? Well, we know the resolution is a non-binding but 130.

It is nothing very special. I have looked in the United Nations covering the failures of the General Assembly. You see, the General Assembly is really in the long run is controlled by a few Western countries and they know how to arrange this kind of actions. And I think the fact that they came to the General Assembly clearly shows that at present they are quite short of real instruments to change the course of the development of the events. And it is an attempt to bring psychological pressure on some countries which are members of the United Nations. In this sense it is not going to be anything new that soon, maybe sooner than later, maybe later than sooner, we will come to know that votes in the General Assembly were bought by the Western countries, especially the US, Britain and sometimes France, with the promises of economic help, military equipment deliveries and any other kind of promises that could come to your mind.

So, I don’t take this resolution as an extremely serious event, though a very unpleasant because it clearly shows that the Americans are still dominating the political arena of the United Nations in general. We understand that the UN is on the territory of the United States and many countries are very much dependent on Americans even in keeping their representations there.

One of the bad news of the last weekend is the resignation of the UN special representative Kofi Annan. And as we know, as he resigned his post he blamed, like he put “finger-pointing and name-calling” at the UN Security Council.

Basically it is connected with the problem of major powers rivalry and deep disagreements. And in this sense there was no chance of bridging the disagreements and Kofi Annan saw it by himself. What we see now is a continuation of the so-called Arab Spring and the Americans right from the beginning had Syria in mind. After finishing with Egypt, Libya, they came to Syria. And to the astonishment of progressive mankind, so to say, the Americans make a deal in the name of democracy. Unbelievable! They make a deal with the most reactionary forces in the Arab world, the countries in which democracy is a curse word and is not practiced – with Saudi Arabia and some kingdoms of the Persian Gulf. So, these are the most reactionary forces in the Arab world and they are trying to destroy Syrian democracy because being a multiethnic state Syria nevertheless claims much more democracy than Saudi Arabia would reach in the next 25 years.

So, the American deal with this kind of forces is very disgusting I would say, but not only disgusting but very disturbing. It clearly shows the irreparable damage to American democracy itself and to the American way of thinking in the future.

Posted in: NATO, Syria