Washington Wearing a Humanitarian Mask Once Again

Under the cover of false humanitarian motives and supposed concern for civilian lives, the U.S. is striving to pass a new resolution on Syria through its allies and agents in the U.N. Security Council. This resolution would allow the U.S. to exploit U.N. agencies in order to enter some of Syria’s conflict zones and save the armed terrorist gangs being blockaded, equipping them with means of power and survival. The U.S. could then capitalize on the terrorist activities during the long series of negotiations in Geneva and other places.

The draft resolution, which Australia presented to the Security Council and Washington, London and Paris supported — as planned — calls to condemn terrorism in all its forms in its mine-ridden preamble. It dictates that if the resolution is not implemented, the issue must be referred to the Security Council, so that it can take other measures. It calls upon all sides to immediately raise the blockade on residential areas. Likewise, it calls for the cessation of all attacks on civilians and the opening of a safe and speedy humanitarian corridor surrounded by barriers set up by U.N. agencies and their partners!

In appearance and substance, the party giving lethal weapons, training, field experience and intelligence to terrorist groups cannot rightfully be a dove of peace or a humanitarian body giving assistance. And in principle, it is difficult for the U.S., which has a long history of being involved in tragedies and wars against other peoples and communities, to conduct pure humanitarian activity when what is in its past is not really in the past. In the crisis concocted against Syria, Washington has constituted and still constitutes the most embroiled party, the one that has intervened the most in the Syrian issue, so its intentions and courses of action cannot be trusted, even if they sometimes include some humanitarian aspects. There is no independent or sovereign country in the world that allows food shipments or humanitarian aid to enter its territory without its knowledge or supervision. So, anyone who rants about his desire and intention to give weapons to those fighting the Syrian state cannot be trusted, even if he tries to shed crocodile tears over the civilians and wear the mask of humanitarianism, as Washington and its allies are doing!

Humanitarian aid for Syrians must enter via the official institutions and border crossings of the Syrian state. Otherwise, it is a blatant incursion into Syria’s internal affairs and a violation of its sovereignty and independence. There is an agreement and mutual understanding between the Syrian government and U.N. agencies about sending humanitarian aid to the regions blockaded and damaged because of terrorism by terrorist groups, an agreement that the Syrian government is applying and abiding by, with the recognition of these agencies. If there are observations made, obstacles or breaches, their source is the armed groups that wickedly use civilians as human shields to protect themselves and as a tool to attract provisions, aid, funding and weapons from the sides supporting them. In their own consideration, any agreement that consolidates Syrian sovereignty and pulls supplies out of their hands hurts these gangs.

Aware of the West’s political games and tricks it plays with international and humanitarian law, in the draft of the new resolution, Russia saw an attempt to support terrorism under a humanitarian cover. Certainly, the accusation of Sergey Lavrov, Russia’s head of diplomacy, that U.S. policy in Syria is encouraging the funding and supply of terrorist organizations did not come out of the blue: Washington previously exploited a humanitarian resolution in Libya, attacking the country, forcefully deposing its regime and turning it into a land of weapons and militias. The rest of the story is well known.

Thus, America’s concern for civilians is a false concern that conceals many evil motives aimed at changing the situation in the field in favor of the takfiri [Translator’s note: The author is referring to Islamists of a particular Sunni political-ideological trend that excommunicates Muslims who do not subscribe to it] and terrorist groups, whose wounds are treated in the hospitals of Washington’s closest ally, the Zionist entity. The question that forcefully imposes itself is the following: Does the Zionist entity deal with these terrorists out of compassion and humanitarianism, with nothing in it for itself, or for its own interests in weakening Syria and weakening the country’s role by obstructing its colonialist, expansionist aspirations?

If the U.S. were really honest in its new "humanitarian" course, it would give aid directly to displaced Syrians in the neighboring countries. A couple of those countries — Turkey and Jordan — are within Washington’s circle of allies and agents. Nobody is stopping it, and it does not need a Security Council resolution, even though those people are living in conditions far worse than the those being lived of the internally displaced, for whom the Syrian state guarantees shelter and aid to help them escape their difficult circumstances. However, Washington’s attention is fixed exclusively on helping its collaborators on the inside because they are its last bet for shaking up circumstances in Syria in order to serve its own hostile agenda.

The strangest and most painful thing tainting the issue of humanitarian aid is that America and the West only give support, money and weapons to the groups that displace Syrians, making them leave their houses, cities and villages with mortar shells, rockets, car bombs, improvised explosives and suicide bombers. It is as though the real goal is to create a Syrian tragedy that makes the world forget about the Palestinian tragedy — their exodus and refugee problem — and relieve Israel and the West of its repercussions.