With Syrian rebels, including both Jihadist groups and what the west defined as moderates, losing their territory in the war-torn country, a new chapter is being written in the bloody chronical of the Syrian war. The above is a televised discussion on these changing realities and their ramifications to Israel.
RD WEBCAST: With the first round of Syrian peace talks in Moscow now complete and the second on their way in March, talk is of how to adjust the “Moscow format” to produce a final settlement to the Syrian crisis.
The Geneva format for Syrian peace talks was supposed to pave the road to a comprehensive agreement and, ultimately, a settlement of the Syrian crisis. However, the last meeting in Geneva, which took place a year ago, delivered almost zero results and left the conflict without foreseeable hope for future settlement. In response, Russia’s Foreign Ministry invited Syrian opposition leaders and the Syrian government to sit down and discuss the issues in Moscow from Jan. 26-29.
The Cold War is long gone, says the American president, and the Ukrainian affair is not a“ Cold War chessboard.” Syria and Ukraine, he adds, are about “expression of hopes” rather than acts of regional powers. After all, the people – 96% of them to be exact – have spoken! And so goes for Iran: “If John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan could negotiate with the Soviet Union, then surely a strong and confident America can negotiate with less powerful adversaries today.” But the parallel between past and present deserves closer inspection, especially given the president’s reluctance to intervene in any battle, be it Ukraine, Syria or Iran. Apparently, there is a difference between battles of ideas to one of “international law” and perhaps this is what Ukraine might teach us about Iran.
But this parallel between past and present deserves closer inspection, especially given the president’s reluctance to intervene in any battle, be it Ukraine, Syria or Iran. Apparently, there is a difference between a battle of ideas and one of “international law.”
America and its allies in Europe never forgot their united opposition to the Soviet Union, and to its world view, so inherently incompatible with their own. They recognized, correctly, that the Soviets had a clear ideology juxtaposed with global ambitions, in which a free world had no place. They also recognized that, left unchallenged, those ambitions would weaken the free world, and perhaps completely destroy it. Continue reading “Ukraine, Iran and the Cold War”