GRA: Western media confidently say that the fall of the current Syrian regime is inevitable. In your opinion, how well founded this prediction is, and is there some political power that can bring order to this situation?

C.M.: Western strategists and their Arab allies had announced that the Syrian regular army would be defeated before the end of Ramadan; but now it seems that they deluded themselves with false hopes, because the death squads of terrorists and mercenaries have registered thousands of dead, wounded and prisoners. Unlike the informations diffused by the embedded media, the armed gangs suffered a crushing defeat on the battlefields. Therefore I think that the Syrian Arab Republic will not collapse so easily as expected by U.S. and the others, notwithstanding its state of extreme weakness. At present, the Syrian government is the only political power which can face the disorder, if not bring order.



GRA: How likely is a forceful U.S. intervention in the Syrian conflict and attempt to violently overthrow the regime of Bashar al-Assad (or the U.S. will keep a distance and will not dare to risk)? Under circumstances of such a possibility, what consequences it will bring to America itself?

C. M.: The U. S. partecipation in the aggression against Syria is a matter of fact, because the mercenaries have been entrained by CIA in Turkey. Concerning a more direct intervention of U.S. against Syria, I think we must wait until November, when the presidential elections will be held. However, the U.S. strategy is clear: in its attempt to retard the decline of U.S. hegemony, Washington tries to divide Eurasia by all means; therefore U.S. want to subvert and balkanize Northern Africa, Middle East, Caucasus and Central Asia. Then Syria will not be let in peace.



GRA: How do you assess Russia’s position in this issue? Is Russia able to compromise, yielding to the wiles of the West (for example, the proposal of Hillary Clinton to establish demilitarized zone), despite the fact that Russia has already received a very difficult experience in the situation in Libya?

C. M.: Thanks to God, Moscow has not repeated the unforgivable mistake committed in Libya. Indeed Syria is more important for almost two reasons. First, the naval base at Tartus permits to the Russian fleet to navigate in the Mediterranean Sea. Second, the installation of a wahhabite regime in Syria would infect and destabilize other Muslim territories, also inside Russia. Abandoning Syria, Russia would hardly damage itself. It is unthinkable.



GRA: How, in your opinion, will deploy the situation after the overthrow of Bashar Assad? According to the informations disseminated through the media, there are dozens of catastrophic scenarios.

C.M.: The regime change in Syria would cause a lebanization of its territory. The scenario painted by the English agency Maplecroft, for example, is the following: “Kurds in the north, Druze in the southern hills, Alawites in the coastal northwestern mountainous region and the Sunni majority elsewhere”. Dore Gold, President of Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs and counsellor of Netanyahu, wishes “a new form of chaos replacing what has existed”. The Zionist Yinon Plan previews a multiplicity of clashes: between Sunnis and Shias, Muslims and Christians and so on, not only in Syria, but in the whole Middle East. It is a regional application of Brzezinski’s theory of “Eurasian Balkans”.



GRA: One possible scenario is the territorial division of Syria into three parts. Chagry Erhan, Director of the Center of Strategic Research of the European peoples, believes that the Baath regime, that is being removed from power, will try to create a new state on the basis of belonging to a madhhab through Latakia-Tartus, what can lead to a decision of destruction or assimilation of the Sunni population. In addition, such a step (creation of a new State) can undertake also the Kurds. And here raises a difficult question – how to prevent the partition of the country? Erhan believes that once the government will intervene in the process by violent means, this will lead to more bloodshed. How likely do you think this scenario is?

C. M.: This scenario is not a new one. In 1920 the Society of Nations charged France with a mandate on Syria and Lebanon, so that at the end of July Emir Faysal had to leave Syria, whose territory was divided into many little states, directly or undirectly governed by French authorities. In September 1920 France created the “State” of Aleppo, the “State” of Damascus and the Territory of Alawites (this was the name given by French administration to the Nusayris, in Northern Syria); in March 1921 the Druze Jebel was created. In the following year, the Territory of Alawites became a “State” and was assembled with Damascus and Aleppo in the Syrian Federation, but in 1924 it was detached from it. U.S. and their allies want come back to a similar situation. Also the World Zionist Organization stated very clearly since 1982: “Israel’s principal purpose must be the breaking of Syria and Irak into regions determined by ethnical and confessional criteria, the first stage being the distruction of the military power of these States”.


30 agosto 2012

Questo articolo è coperto da ©Copyright, per cui ne è vietata la riproduzione parziale o integrale. Per maggiori informazioni sull'informativa in relazione al diritto d'autore del sito visita Questa pagina.