Another Fragment in the Overall Picture

Orientalist scholar and former diplomat Vyacheslav Matuzov talks about what should traditionally be expected from the U.S. after its accusations against Russia with regard to the chemical attack.

The accusations brought by the U.S. against Russia and the legitimate Russian-backed Syrian government should not be viewed as a separate statement, but as one of the small fragments of a more general picture. The statement about the use of chemical weapons has already become a commonplace tool used to justify United States aggression.

Currently, the Syrian army is finishing the mop-up operation in Eastern Ghouta. Technically, that entails the terms of surrender. It is silly to use chemical weapons in a situation where military victory is so close. In particular, it is silly to use chemical weapons in an area where civilians are being held hostage by terrorists who do not let people leave the battleground and use them as human shields that protect them from the Syrian army’s offensive.

However, we are used to the fact that as soon as the Syrian army begins an offensive against the terrorists in Syria, thanks to the U.S., there immediately appears to be another case of “the use of chemical weapons,” with photos of doctors treating mutilated children.

The first time the United States tried to use the chemical weapons approach was when the Syrian government withdrew all its chemical munitions arsenals and transferred them to the United States under the strict supervision of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons.* However, all of a sudden, the U.S. has again revisited the subject of chemical weapons even after full confirmation that there are no chemical weapons in Syria. And using the pretext that chemical weapons are being used, they intend to inflict a direct military strike on the Syrian army and the Syrian leadership, and complete the Syrian campaign.

Back in 2013, the U.S. did not leave Russia’s tough and firm position on Syria unanswered — it instigated a Maidan campaign in Kiev against Victor Yanukovych, who was allegedly supported by Moscow. This was irrational. Elections were scheduled to take place in a year, and Yanukovych was ready to leave and surrender his power to pro-American politicians like Viktor Yushchenko and Yulia Tymoshenko.** However, the United States wanted to punish Russia for its stubborn position on the Syrian agenda, but it made a rushed decision. In my opinion, Maidan is a response to our position on preventing U.S. aggression in Syria in 2013.

Then terrorists started escaping from Aleppo. Immediately after that, in a town called Khan Shaykhun near near Aleppo, someone supposedly again used chemical weapons. Thus, the use of chemical weapons has become the paranoid idea of the U.S. government.***

I suppose that in the current environment, when the U.S. all of a sudden states that chemical weapons were used in Eastern Ghouta, we should pay close attention to its military preparations. I’m afraid that these long-running discussions about the possibility of a U.S. air strike against the positions of the Syrian army and even the palace of President Bashar Assad in Damascus are not unreasonable. Any mention of chemical weapons use in Syria is a casus belli for U.S. aggression or a possible strike by a third party.

Here is a confirmation of that. Eight Israeli rockets were launched in an airstrike on the Syrian air base T-4 (Tiyas) through the territory of Lebanon. Three rockets hit the target. Up to 20 Syrian military personnel were killed. Russian helicopters Ka-52, Mi-8 and other aircraft were also at this base.

Here’s a question for Israel: are its assertions about good relations with Russia not genuine? Should we consider these actions as collusion with terrorist organizations in Syria? After all, Israel’s air force attackes the Nusra Front, the Islamic State and other terrorists.

I’m positive that we should look at the actively spinning story about an attempt to poison Sergei Skripal in London in the same context. The conclusion is that authorities are probing the Russian government’s possible reaction to any military actions by the United States in the Middle East.

If there was an international criminal code, then all these accusations would justify instituting criminal proceedings for defamation.**** The U.S. should be punished for its defamatory activity. These statements and accusations by the State Department cannot be perceived any other way.

As a result, this is a game against Russia at the global level. The U.S. is basically running the show at the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. Moscow can hardly take this organization seriously or trust its conclusions after the organization has dodged analyzing the real situation in Syria in the last year. As we can see from the discussions held at the U.N. Security Council, the United States is totally opposed to the creation of an independent commission to investigate the use of chemical weapons, in accordance with the U.N. Charter because the U.S. is satisfied with the corrupt crowd it created in this organization. And not only there, by the way, but in the majority of international agencies, including the United Nations Human Rights Council and Doctors Without Borders. These organizations are under the total control of the U.S. I believe that it would be a silly mistake to consider them objective international organizations.

Currently all the critics of Russian foreign policy have the same story line: on the one hand there is Russia, on the other hand there is an international community. However, there is no “community.” This is an illusion created with the help of the organizations controlled by the United States. Sadly enough, we are members and financial supporters of these organizations, too.

*Translator’s note: The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons is an intergovernmental organization and the implementing body for the Chemical Weapons Convention, which took effect on April 29, 1997.

**Translator’s note: Viktor Yushchenko is a Ukrainian politician who was the third president of Ukraine from Jan. 23, 2005 to Feb. 25, 2010. Yulia Tymoshenko is a Ukrainian politician. She co-led the Orange Revolution and was the first woman appointed prime minister of Ukraine, serving from Jan. 24, 2005 to Sept. 8, 2005, and again from Dec. 18, 2007 to March 4, 2010.

***Translator’s note: The Khan Shaykhun chemical attack took place on April 4, 2017 on the town of Khan Shaykhun in the Idlib Governorate of Syria. At the time of the attack, the town was under the control of Tahrir al-Sham, previously known as the Nusra Front. According to the U.S. government, the Syrian government under Assad was behind the chemical attack, and Syrian jets carried out the bombing of a rebel stronghold. U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was quoted as saying, “Either Russia has been complicit or Russia has been simply incompetent.”

****Editor’s note: Defamation is a civil cause of action, not a criminal cause of action.