martes, 3 de febrero de 2015

Campaña Aérea de EEUU en Iraq y Siria según Bashar Al Assad

Foreign Affairs entrevistó recientemente al Presidente de Siria. Resultan interesantes sus respuestas sobre la campaña aérea que ha liderado EEUU en contra de ISIS  que reflejan una campaña más para la galería que efectiva (Ver en este Blog Isis Goza de Buena Salud).

El Presidente Sirio llama la atención sobre el apoyo de Turquía, Arabia Saudita y Qatar, aliados próximos de EEUU, a las fuerzas de Al Qaeda y de ISIS. ¿Es válido esto que "los amigos de mis amigos son mis amigos"? Por eso más que una acción militar contra Isis él cree más eficaz una acción política con los aliados de EEUU que son los reales apoyos del Estado Islámico.

Recuerda también el Presidente Sirio que la campaña aérea es ilegal, sin la aprobación del Gobierno de Siria y que las fuerzas terrestres que entrena EEUU y sus aliados en caso de entrar a Siria, se enfrentarán con las fuerzas del Gobierno. Está claro entonces que aún está por verse un nuevo capítulo de la agresión de Occidente a Siria. El 2013 Occidente abortó su ataque a causa de la oposición de Rusia y China. 

Ver en este Blog:

Isis Goza de Buena Salud






Bashar al-Assad
Extracto de la entrevista. Los subrayados en rojo son de este Blog

Since the United States began its air campaign against the Islamic State, Syria and the United States have become strange kinds of partners and are effectively cooperating in that aspect of the fight. Do you see the potential for increased cooperation with the United States?
Yes, the potential is definitely always there, because we’ve been talking about or asking for international cooperation against terrorism for 30 years. But this potential needs will. The question that we have is, how much will does the United States have to really fight terrorism on the ground? So far, we haven’t seen anything concrete in spite of the attacks on ISIS in northern Syria. There’s nothing concrete. What we’ve seen so far is just, let’s say, window-dressing, nothing real. Since the beginning of these attacks, ISIS has gained more land in Syria and Iraq.


What about the air strikes on Kobani? Those have been effective in slowing down ISIS.
Kobani is a small city, with about 50,000 inhabitants. It’s been more than three months since the beginning of the attacks, and they haven’t finished. Same areas, same al Qaeda factions occupying them—the Syrian army liberated in less than three weeks. It means they’re not serious about fighting terrorism.
So are you saying you want greater U.S. involvement in the war against ISIS?
It’s not about greater involvement by the military, because it’s not only about the military; it’s about politics. It’s about how much the United States wants to influence the Turks. Because if the terrorists can withstand the air strikes for this period, it means that the Turks keep sending them armaments and money. Did the United States put any pressure on Turkey to stop the support of al Qaeda? They didn’t; they haven’t. So it’s not only about military involvement. This is first. Second, if you want to talk about the military involvement, American officials publicly acknowledge that without troops on the ground, they cannot achieve anything concrete. Which troops on the grounds are you depending on?
So are you suggesting there should be U.S. troops on the ground?
Not U.S. troops. I’m talking about the principle, the military principle. I’m not saying American troops. If you want to say I want to make war on terrorism, you have to have troops on the ground. The question you have to ask the Americans is, which troops are you going to depend on? Definitely, it has to be Syrian troops. This is our land; this is our country. We are responsible. We don’t ask for American troops at all.
So what would you like to see from the United States? You mentioned more pressure on Turkey ...
Pressure on Turkey, pressure on Saudi Arabia, pressure on Qatar to stop supporting the rebels. Second, to make legal cooperation with Syria and start by asking permission from our government to make such attacks. They didn’t, so it’s illegal.
I’m sorry, I’m not clear on that point. You want them to make legal ... ?
Of course, if you want to make any kind of action in another country, you ask their permission.
I see. So a formal agreement between Washington and Damascus to allow for air strikes?
The format we can discuss later, but you start with permission. Is it an agreement? Is it a treaty? That’s another issue.
And would you be willing to take steps to make cooperation easier with Washington?
With any country that is serious about fighting terrorism, we are ready to make cooperation, if they’re serious.
What steps would you be prepared to make to show Washington that you’re willing to cooperate?
I think they are the ones who have to show the will. We are already fighting on the ground; we don’t have to show that.
The United States is currently training 5,000 Syrian fighters who are scheduled to enter Syria in May. Now, U.S. General John Allen has been very careful to say that these troops will not be directed at the Syrian government, but will be focused on ISIS alone. What will you do when these troops enter the country? Will you allow them to enter? Will you attack them?
Any troops that don’t work in cooperation with the Syrian army are illegal and should be fought. That’s very clear.
Even if this brings you into conflict with the United States?
Without cooperation with Syrian troops, they are illegal, and are puppets of another country, so they are going to be fought like any other illegal militia fighting against the Syrian army. But that brings another question, about those troops. Obama said that they are a fantasy. How did fantasy become reality?

Otras columnas de este Blog sobre Siria





No hay comentarios:

Publicar un comentario