Wednesday, June 21, 2017

France24 — Macron Rolls Back on ‘Assad Must Go’ Position


Needless to say, this is welcome news and a positive development in a sea of otherwise negative news and the gathering of war clouds.
President Emmanuel Macron said in remarks published on Wednesday that he saw no legitimate successor to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and that France no longer considered his departure a pre-condition to resolving the six-year conflict.
France24
Macron Rolls Back on ‘Assad Must Go’ Position
Macron said he will not allow US “neo-conservatism” to seep into France, and that the focus of French policy will be aimed at achieving “stability” in Syria, rather than getting dragged into a Libya-style conflict.
“What was the outcome of these interventions? Failed states in which terrorist groups flourished. I do not want that in Syria,” the French leader emphasized.
RT
France’s Macron sees no ‘legitimate successor’ to Assad, declares terrorism a common enemy in Syria

20 comments:

Kaivey said...

This is good. So the policy of the US is the removal of Assad. Bit what right do they have to remove Assad? Surely that's meddling into another country's affairs. Surely its down to the Syrian period to decide? I thought Washington said that meddling into another country's affairs was an act of war.

Bob said...

Removal of Assad through the use of proxies. They want him gone, but not so badly that they are willing to invade Syria. It's just a warm-up for the real target, Iran.

Ralph Musgrave said...

Kaivey and Bob, I don't believe for one minute that the US and its European poodles want Assad gone. The US in in Syria first to stop Russia gaining military bases, in particular a naval base, in Syria. Second, constant chaos in Syria suits Isreal, and Anglo-Saxons are so dumb that they largely do what Jews tell them to do. Certainly I've seen plenty of cartoons making the latter point.

Kaivey said...

I know. I read that if the rebels win on Syria it will create so much havoc that you won't have seen anything like it. Iran would be on deep sh*t as the jihadists march towards it. This is the bloodbath the US supports. But we are constantly told the US are the good guys.

Postkey said...

I don't know if " . . . Anglo-Saxons are so dumb that they largely do what Jews tell them to do." Then I haven't seen "plenty of cartoons . . . "

What appears to be the case is that?

"Israeli Intel Chief: We Don’t Want ISIS Defeated in Syria
Says ISIS Faces Difficulty, Loss Would Put Israel in 'Hard Position'Jason Ditz June 21, 2016NewsISIS, Israel"
http://news.antiwar.com/2016/06/21/israeli-intel-chief-we-dont-want-isis-defeated-in-syria/

“Ex-defense minister says IS ‘apologized’ to Israel for November clash”
http://www.timesofisrael.com/ex-defense-minister-says-is-apologized-to-israel-for-november-clash/

“Israel quite openly backing al-Qaeda in Syria. Interview with former Mossad chief Efraim Halevy."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkjQQh2hol8

Ralph Musgrave said...

Postkey, It's difficult to prove my theory about Jews and dumb Anglos, but certainly there is a powerful Jewish / Isreal lobby in the US. I remember reading that the US gives more aid to Isreal than the whole of Africa.

Plus Isreal managed to wheedle nuclear secrets out of the Brits to make Israeli nukes. Plus Jews are in powerful positions in the press.

Tom Hickey said...

This is good. So the policy of the US is the removal of Assad. Bit what right do they have to remove Assad? Surely that's meddling into another country's affairs. Surely its down to the Syrian period to decide? I thought Washington said that meddling into another country's affairs was an act of war.

The US has already committed illegal aggression in Syria putting troops in Syria without a UN mandate and no Syrian attack or threat to the US to engage the self-defense argument. The US has no legal authority to be the world's judge and policeman, especially when US policy has an obvious connection to economic interest.

This is considered a capital offense as established at Nuremburg and the worst of war crimes according to international law. Of course, no US leaders will ever be prosecuted for it, but the US is taking a big hit to soft power because of it and losing it moral influence in the world.

Economic sanctions against a state is also an act of war, like a blockade.

Tom Hickey said...

Removal of Assad through the use of proxies. They want him gone, but not so badly that they are willing to invade Syria. It's just a warm-up for the real target, Iran.

Are you paying attention? The US has already invaded Syria, entering militarily without the permission of the government, or a UN mandate, or in self-defense owing to attack or even threat.

The has established US multiple bases in Syria and some pretty serious weaponry in addition to troops.

Tom Hickey said...

Like Iv'e been saying — thugs practicing thuggery under the guise of foreign policy.

Bob said...

What are you talking about? There's no US invasion of Syria.

Tom Hickey said...

What are you talking about? There's no US invasion of Syria.

Entering a sovereign country with troops and equipment without the permission of the sovereign, or an mandate under international law, or self-defense owing to attack or immediate threat constitutes an invasion.

Syria has protested to the UN, and Russia has called out the US for illegal aggression.

Tom Hickey said...

BTW, one of the tactical reasons that US troops are sprinkled around in Syria is so that Russia cannot attack the proxies with whom the US troops are embedded.

Bob said...

Aggression, yes. Invasion, no.

BTW, one of the tactical reasons that US troops are sprinkled around in Syria is so that Russia cannot attack the proxies with whom the US troops are embedded.

We'll see. Russia can up the ante anytime they want.

Tom Hickey said...

Shooting down the Syrian aircraft was an act of aggression. The introduction of troops is an invasion. It doesn't have to be sudden. It can be a gradual escalation as the US is doing, at first somewhat covertly but now publicly with the introduction of artillery. Putting artillery in another country leaves no doubt that this is an invasion.

Bob said...

It's shaping up to be a standoff, whereby Syria is partitioned into three or more zones. The vast majority of ground forces are proxies. If the US launches an invasion everyone will know about it, and be opposed to it. One estimate is that it would take 150,000 soldiers to depose Assad.

Tom Hickey said...

The US just attempted to establish a no-fly zone for Syrian military aircraft by shooting one down. Russia offered to target US aircraft in return with surface to air missiles.

The US has also moved in artillery into Syria capable of targeting Syrian and Iranian forces.

Bob said...

They claim this is defensive. They claim they do not want Syria or Iran to interfere with their operations against ISIS. Sounds legit, doesn't it?

Tom Hickey said...

They claim this is defensive. They claim they do not want Syria or Iran to interfere with their operations against ISIS. Sounds legit, doesn't it?

Complete nonsense. The US has no invitation to fight ISIS within Syria, no UN mandate, faces no threat from ISIS in Syria to the US, and is in Syria illegally, possibly under US law. The US Senate just asked the Trump administration for a legal justification for US action in Syria. Turkey is also operating militarily in Syria in violation of international law, fighting the US backed Kurds while claiming to be fighting ISIS, who Turkey has supported.

Conversely, Syria is a sovereign nation with the right and duty to oppose terrorists within its borders and Syria has invited the assistance of Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah.

Tom Hickey said...

BTW, while the US has been invited by Iraq to support the fight against ISIS, the US has been allowing ISIS forces to escape into Syria to attack Assad's government and then claiming it is fighting ISIS in Syria.

Bob said...

Syria is a partially sovereign nation, provided that Russia and Iran continue to prop up Assad up. The rest of the country is up for grabs.

The battle for Mosul has been bloody. It's a larger city than Aleppo. US proxies have been doing their share of fighting ISIS and now its the Kurd's turn to make a push into Raqqa.

Iran has lost influence in Iraq because of US backing to retake Mosul.