Not a Hegemony
Published in Izvestia
(Russia) on 14 April 2018
by Vyacheslav Matuzov (link to original)
(Russia) on 14 April 2018
by Vyacheslav Matuzov (link to original)
Translated from
by Olga Devine.
Edited by Joel Horowitz.
Orientalist scholar and former diplomat Vyacheslav Matuzov talks about how the United States tried to assert itself in the Middle East.
The missile strikes by the United States, France and the United Kingdom on Syria on April 14 indicate that the policy of the United States is reaching a dead end. What was the reason behind these strikes? Were they made in order to change the foreign policy of Syria, Russia and Iran supporting the Syrian army? Or to give military support for the terrorist groups that were defeated when the last of their strongholds in Duma, in the suburbs of Damascus, was destroyed?
It's already clear that this act of aggression went beyond the framework of international law, flouting the United Nations Charter. The U.S. is trying to establish its own order in the Middle East, and particularly in Syria, without the sanction of the U.N. Security Council.
This military campaign, which pretty much caused Syria no human or material losses, can be viewed in only one way. This was a demonstration of power and self-assertiveness by the United States after its defeat in Syria as a world power, as a world hegemony. Under no circumstances should this be viewed as a victory for the United States or as its way of getting closure on this 7-year war by the Syrian government against terrorism.
This is definitely the continuation of the U.S. policy which used terrorist groups to overthrow the Syrian government, although now it is happening with direct U.S. military involvement. The U.S. planned this precise type of military involvement immediately after the export of the Syrian chemical arsenal. Only the firm Russian position in 2013 prevented the United States from taking similar action five years ago.
The U.S. has now gone the distance of conducting a direct military invasion. However, the U.S. missile strikes on the Syrian army only show that the U.S. has lost its temper, causing huge damage to its image and its foreign policy in the Middle East, especially in light of the fact that international terrorist groups in Syria are being destroyed in attacks by the Syrian army with the support of the Russian air force as well as advisers and volunteers from Iran and Hezbollah. I believe that the U.S. launched these missile strikes not so much to destroy the Syrian government, but to reassert itself. The United States has tried to appear before the world as a global power, restoring its hegemony in the world. However, it has turned out differently.
The missile strikes by the United States, France and the United Kingdom on Syria on April 14 indicate that the policy of the United States is reaching a dead end. What was the reason behind these strikes? Were they made in order to change the foreign policy of Syria, Russia and Iran supporting the Syrian army? Or to give military support for the terrorist groups that were defeated when the last of their strongholds in Duma, in the suburbs of Damascus, was destroyed?
It's already clear that this act of aggression went beyond the framework of international law, flouting the United Nations Charter. The U.S. is trying to establish its own order in the Middle East, and particularly in Syria, without the sanction of the U.N. Security Council.
This military campaign, which pretty much caused Syria no human or material losses, can be viewed in only one way. This was a demonstration of power and self-assertiveness by the United States after its defeat in Syria as a world power, as a world hegemony. Under no circumstances should this be viewed as a victory for the United States or as its way of getting closure on this 7-year war by the Syrian government against terrorism.
This is definitely the continuation of the U.S. policy which used terrorist groups to overthrow the Syrian government, although now it is happening with direct U.S. military involvement. The U.S. planned this precise type of military involvement immediately after the export of the Syrian chemical arsenal. Only the firm Russian position in 2013 prevented the United States from taking similar action five years ago.
The U.S. has now gone the distance of conducting a direct military invasion. However, the U.S. missile strikes on the Syrian army only show that the U.S. has lost its temper, causing huge damage to its image and its foreign policy in the Middle East, especially in light of the fact that international terrorist groups in Syria are being destroyed in attacks by the Syrian army with the support of the Russian air force as well as advisers and volunteers from Iran and Hezbollah. I believe that the U.S. launched these missile strikes not so much to destroy the Syrian government, but to reassert itself. The United States has tried to appear before the world as a global power, restoring its hegemony in the world. However, it has turned out differently.
Previous article![]( "Trump on the 2018 Ballot")
Next article![]( "Russia-Iran Axis Will Remain on Top in Syria Despite West’s Airstrikes")
