Who benefits from using chemical weapons?

Friday, August 30

10:20 GMT: The German government has ruled out participation in any military action. It will not consider any "military participation and still aren't doing so," government spokesman Steffen Seibert told reporters.

09:58 GMT: Russia has said it will make all efforts to stave off any “military scenario” against Syria.

Moscow “does not understand” why UN team should leave Syria after investigating only one site of an alleged chemical attack, statement issued by the Kremlin reads.

Thursday, August 29

23:13 GMT: President Obama is prepared to decide on military action against Syria on his own, “in the best interests of the US,” the White House said in a statement after the British Parliament rejected a motion approving the UK’s military involvement in the anti-Assad coalition.

22:32 GMT: Any possibility of British involvement in a military campaign in Syria has been effectively ruled out after British lawmakers voted down the prospect in parliament, costing the US the nation’s closest ally in a potential strike.

After the defeat in the parliament, the UK Prime Minister David Cameron admitted it was clear that Britons did not want action and said he “will act accordingly.”

20:48 GMT: The Russian called meeting of the UN Security Council on the developing situation in Syria has failed to achieve results on Thursday. The discussions which lasted for less than an hour ended as sides failed to reach an agreement with the ambassadors of China, France, Britain, Russia and the United States gradually leaving the talks.

This is the second time, the permanent five met to discuss the UK submitted resolution on Syria. On Wednesday, the Security Council met to debate the draft resolution that could pave the way for military intervention in Syria.

Russia remains strongly opposed to foreign interference, citing that there is no proof that the Syrian regime was responsible for the alleged chemical attack last Wednesday.

“China supports the conduct of a fair, objective and professionally done [UN] investigation without exertion of any pressure from the outside,” Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said, calling all the sides to “refrain from forecasting the results, let alone undertaking any kind of actions.”

Who benefits from using chemical weapons?

The narrative that the Assad government used chemical weapons, specifically while a UN team was in Damascus to investigate previous uses of chemical weapons, is tactically and politically illogical and in no way serves the interests of the Syrian government.

These attacks transparently serve the interests of anti-government militias who have long called for NATO intervention, as well as the Syrian political opposition who are now refusing to take part in any planned Geneva negotiations. Furthermore, allegations that the regime used chemical weapons benefits the international opponents of Assad, who have materially and financially aided and armed non-state actors and foreign fighters on an unprecedented scale.

Дата добавления: 2015-10-31