After five years of war in Syria, the masks have come off. The publication of the text of the Russo-US agreement reveals the hidden intentions of the two great powers – Washington wants to cut the «Silk Road», while Moscow wants to destroy the jihadists. Moreover, the failure of this agreement and the Security Council debates demonstrate the surrealist nature of President Obama’s rhetoric – in five years he has not managed to constitute even a minor group of «moderate» opposition, and therefore is unable to field them, contrary to the text of the agreement. The United States are not capable of honouring their signature.
The failure of the Russo-US agreement of 9 September and the Security Council debates which followed have enabled us to confirm several hypotheses.
The current strategic objective of the United States in Syria is indeed to cut the «Silk Road», which China has been preparing for many years. Placing President Xi Jinping in power in May 2013, China has made the restoration of this historic communication route its main goal. However, since China has become the world’s principal producer, Xi has planned to augment it with a «new Silk Road» which will pass through Siberia and Eastern Europe before joining up with the European Union.
Logically enough, the United States are currently organising two proxy wars, one in the Levant, and the other in Ukraine. The installation of chaos in Syria and Donbass are not aimed at satisfying the cynical theories of Leo Strauss, but exclusively to cut the axes of these routes.
It was no surprise that Ukrainian President Petro Porochenko came to participate in the Security Council meeting in order to support the US delegation, which accused Russia of having bombed a Syrian humanitarian convoy.
The Russo-US agreement anticipated that the United States would separate the «moderate» combatants from the «extremists»; then that the «moderates» would participate with the two major powers and the Syrian Arab Army in the neutralisation of the «extremists»; and finally, that a government of national union would be formed in Damascus, under the Presidency of Bachar el-Assad, integrating representatives of the «moderates» who had taken part in the final battle against the «extremists».
But nothing like this has been done. The engagement of Secretary of State John Kerry has proven to be no more than wishful thinking. Washington has not found any combatants to play the role of the «moderates». In reality, all «moderates» are «extremists». It was therefore necessary for the US to seize the opportunity - or even organise it – of the burned humanitarian convoy, in order to escape from its own contradictions. President Obama’s rhetoric according to which he supports the Syrians who are fighting for Democracy against a repressive régime does not correspond to reality. In 2013, President Vladimir Putin was right to mock the Westerners who considered the cannibals of the Free Syrian Army as «moderates».
Finally, this agreement reveals that Russia’s objective is to destroy the jihadists who are preparing here to attack them in the Caucasus. The solution that was originally negotiated was ideal for Moscow – it put an end to the suffering of its Syrian ally, it opened a communication route for its Chinese ally, and promised to put an end to international jihadism. A contrario, Moscow has just confirmed that, since the war in Afghanistan, jihadism is a weapon which is being used against it by the US, and that Washington does not intend to give it up. Of course, the new jihadists are not aware of this, but those who have been fighting with US assistance for the last 38 years can not ignore that they are no more than pawns for the Pentagon.