Home   Bookmark and Share

 Print Friendly and PDF

Syrian Cease-Fire? Nine Simple Questions.

By Joe Contrarian

February 13, 2016 "
Information Clearing House" - "Syrian War Update " - The cease fire should be very welcome news for millions of ordinary Syrians suffering from Western sponsored terrorist aggression, but closer examination of this and other relevant documents unfortunately created serious doubt about intentions and effectiveness of the agreement in achieving its goals.

Not going into many details of the agreement , linked below, I am asking some fundamental questions that have to be answered if we have to take the agreement for more that just meaningless illusion of peace, something that exhausted Syrian nation does not want or need.

  1. Why Russia supported UN Security Council Resolution 2254, adopted unanimously December 18, 2015   without clarifying legal status of NATO military operations in Syria under Syrian Law? On what legal basis US, French, British or Oman are bombing Syria?
  2. Why Russians or Iranians did not insist on clarification of legal basis under which Israel is bombing Syria and attacking Assad government in violation of UN charter?
  3. Why in UNSCR 2254 and in the Cease Fire Agreement, Russians or Iranians did not insist on clarification of legal status of Turkish aggression in Syria including shooting down lawfully operating Russian military airplane shelling Syrian territory or occupation of 1-2 mile wide sliver of of Syrian land along border?
  4. Why in the UNSCR 2254 and in the Cease Fire Agreement, Russians and/or Iranians did not call for withdrawal of unauthorized by Assad regime foreign military, including US troops from Syrian Kurdistan?
  5. Why in the UNSCR 2254 and in the Cease Fire Agreement, Russians and/or Iranians did not insist on explicit prohibition of introduction of any unauthorized by Syrian government foreign military forces on Syrian territory as a matter of confirmation of Syrian sovereignty and territorial integrity as UN charter requires.
  6. Why in the UNSCR 2254 and in the Cease fire Agreement, Russians and/or Iranians did not insist that no cease fire will be in effect for all those yet undefined “ moderate opposition groups” who have in their ranks foreign mercenaries, non-Syrian citizen, and why expulsion of such has not been required as a precondition to cease fire.
  7. Why Russians and/or Iranians did not insist on finalizing a list of terrorists organization excluded from the Cease fire Agreement before any cease fire implementation may begin since this political/technical issue make the Agreement unenforceable.
  8. Why Russians and/or Syrians did not insist on inclusion of Syrian Kurds in the negotiation, a vital force fighting terrorists.
  9. Should we understand that by signing the UNSCR 2254 and the Cease Fire Agreement Russia legalized NATO aggression against Assad if not why NATO aggression was not prohibited in the agreement although illegality of any aggression is a vital part of UN charter?

If this conclusion is true then the agreement is an illegal act, against UN charter and international law since the only legal representative government of Syria is the representative of Assad regime and the UNCR 2254 is not aimed against Assad regime and hence UNSC cannot infringe on Syrian sovereignty.

In fact quick read of the “agreement” make me realize that it is a meaningless, unenforceable on the ground in Syria, piece of paper that actually allows SAA to move against ISIL and seal Turkish border North of Aleppo but also allows the west preparation for plan B i.e  invasion of Syria. However, what it would surely do is to it provide fertile ground for western accusation of Russian/Syrians breaking the agreement we are so familiar with.

In fact it looks like that critical and so far successful SAA offensive in Idlib falls under the Cease Fire Agreement giving western propaganda a field day. Thank goodness the agreement to be implemented only upon specific local field commanders’ decisions reaching cease-fire along specific segments of the frontlines so it can take months.

But I already see those headlines: “NATO invasion inevitable since those barbaric Russians, breaking all the agreements and still killing all those unborn children”.

This whole fake agreement dangerously sets up Russians for propaganda ambush in million ways and inevitably leads to smuggling of western weaponry hidden inside humanitarian convoys and clandestine evacuation, or reinforcement of ANF and ISIL, true goal of the US in Munich.

Don’t you think that US and allies gave up on invasion by US and Turkey/Saudi. They play for time to rescue they terrorist brothers, while Russians want to deescalate tensions with Turkey they fueled among their population by media reports of preparations for the war.

Scared of empty Turkish and Saudi declarations of invasion?

So why Russia is bending backwards for the west knowing their cunning ways?

It did not work in Ukraine and will not work in Syria. Period.

Full text of the Cease Fire Agreement;


Before ink on my question number 3 of  this post was dry another act of aggression of Turkey against Assad allies Kurds, shelling SAA air base at Menagh.


Preparation for SAA offensive from Moon of Alabama.


South Front: Latest developments.

On Americans bombing of Aleppo 2 hospitals, blame Russians.

 An air Base taken over by Kurds in Mennah, N. Aleppo.

Click for Spanish, German, Dutch, Danish, French, translation- Note- Translation may take a moment to load.

What's your response? -  Scroll down to add / read comments 

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for our FREE Daily Email Newsletter

For Email Marketing you can trust











 Please read our  Comment Policy before posting -
It is unacceptable to slander, smear or engage in personal attacks on authors of articles posted on ICH.
Those engaging in that behavior will be banned from the comment section.




In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Information Clearing House has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is Information ClearingHouse endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

Privacy Statement