'For almost two years, Lakhdar Brahimi sought to bring peace to Syria. But in May, the United Nations special envoy stepped down. He speaks with SPIEGEL about the stubbornness of Syrian President Assad, the mistakes of the West and the dangers presented by Islamic radicals.'
To read the Spiegel interview with Brahimi, please click here.
File photo: Homes, Syria; May 2014 (Spiegel)
4 comments:
A more nuanced and realistic view then I expected from any (ex)official at this point.. Kinda sad how little actual leverage the U.N (as an organization, not as its members) has to back the attitudes proposed by their delegates.
The part about the gas attacks is of particular interest " They have been used, but there are conflicting views about who the culprits were. The UN was specifically requested by the Security Council to merely establish that chemical weapons were used[...]NOT to try to determinate who the guilty party was."
Oh and I love the quite exuberant dislike of the Israeli question (they seem like the only party profiting from the situation)...
How did Assad get chemical weapons? Did Iran play a role?
In possibly related news.............................
At least 22 people killed in suicide attack near Pak-Iran border
" QUETTA: At least 22 people were killed and several others injured in two coordinated suicide blasts near the Pak-Iran border, Taftan late on Sunday night an high level official confirmed.
Balochistan's Home Secretary Akbar Hussain Durrani told Dawn.com that 10 buses carrying Shia pilgrims had entered Pakistan from Iran.
"There were explosions after the buses were parked outside the hotels where the pilgrims were going to stay over night before they commenced their journey back the following day," Durrani said adding that the blasts were followed by intense firing. He feared the casualties will continue to rise."
http://www.dawn.com/news/1111403/at-least-22-people-killed-in-suicide-attack-near-pak-iran-border
Indeed I am surprised at his vocal and explicit anger in addressing the Israeli question, considering that he remained rather vague about that matter during his mandate. Considering his deep and intimate knowledge of the tenants at stake in this conflict, that would speak volumes about who is and who is not interested in seeing Syria recover as a country and people, who supports its proxies to win its own war on top of their backs and set their own agenda forward (The US, GCC states + Turkey vs Iran + Russia), enjoys witnessing the on-going self mutilation of this nation in peril (Israel), is helpless and betrayed (the Syrian people)... simply does not care about his country but rather its own lavish and bloody rule (Assad) and of course, who is actually , pretty much useless in all this : the UN itself. Sad times. Very sad times for this region and the world.
But he pretty much puts the West and Russia on an equal footing when it comes to looking for a military solution rather than a negotiated solution, notably through his depiction of the perfect reciprocity of their respective, unconditional and nonconstructive stances about Assad. I do not see this as "mistake of the West" but rather "mistakes of all external, major parties involved emanating from their selfishness and lack of genuine interest towards the suffering".
Post a Comment