fbpx

Siria: Russia takes over the country

Russia gains ground to the US over Syria, while the regime of Bashar al-Assad continues to repel the rebel troops

Siria: Russia takes over the country

The south of Syria, cradle of the revolution, continues falling before the military offensive supported by Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah. Several media outlets, including Infobae, have reported on the incursion and victory of Syrian government troops in the towns of Deraa and Quneitra.

Leer en español: Siria: Los rusos llegan a tomarse el poder

Russian aircraft continue to bombard the area in order to regain control of the cradle of the revolution. According to the Syrian Human Rights Observatory, the regime of Bashar al-Assad controls 91% of Syrian territory.

As a result, Steven Cook, an expert on international relations in the Middle East and Africa, says in his article " The Syrian War is Over, and America Lost" that the United States is the big loser of this Syrian offensive, given that the country has been losing influence and interference in the area, which contrasts with the increase of Russia's influence in the Middle East.

A proof of the above is the confession, reported by international media, by the US government that has said it will not intervene to defend the rebel troops, something that goes against the statement issued by the US itself. He warned of serious repercussions if the Syrian government broke the ceasefire against rebels in southern Syria, according to Infobae. The reason why it seems that the Pentagon is restructuring its strategy in the Middle East.

Therefore, the message of the United States gives the regime and its allies a free hand to reconquer rebel areas. Consequently, and in the face of the poor performance of the United States in the Middle East, the question everyone asks is: Has the United States lost power and influence in the Middle East?

The United States changes its position in the Middle East

Given the latest events and the political, economic and social context of the United States, the answer is: yes. The geopolitical control of the Middle East seems to change protagonist and Russia acquires more importance within the regional scenario.

The Syrian conflict catapulted Russian influence, which seems to spread to several States in the area, who recognize the importance of Russia to discuss matters of the region.

The Syrian civil war was a coup of authority by Putin and his allies to the Trump government. According to the Foreignpolicy portal, the crude but effective strategy of the Syrian regime made it difficult for the United States to establish a roadmap with clear interests in the region.

The bloody and inhumane offensive, which has left thousands dead and millions displaced, has given military revenues and rebel troops continue to lose important positions, strength, and partners, even several have agreed to surrender agreements, as Steven Cook says.

Therefore, the announcement made to international media by the Trump government to abdicate its influence in the civil war in Syria reflects the change of perception towards the Middle East by the United States. The ambivalence of the Trump government is a feature that foreign policy has taken since its possession, given that the transfer of the US embassy to the city of Jerusalem contrasts with the decision not to support the rebels in southern Syria.

The US Congress is divided and there is no government position around the Middle East. The ambiguity has taken over the top American leaders, who have not yet revealed roadmap map to follow in that place. The truth is that the regime of Bashar-al-Assad continues standing and strengthened by its partners, which are acquiring more geopolitical power in the area.

Likewise, the international community vehemently demands the protection of civil society and hopes that the conflict that has generated an impact on the world will come to an end.

Also read: What is the cause of migration in El Salvador and Honduras?

What does Latin America say about the conflict in Syria?

Most Latin American countries adopted a position of silence during the conflict. However, analysis of the few statements issued in recent years by American heads of state divides the region into two: Partners of Washington and opponents of the United States.

American reactions have as a common denominator the rejection of systematic violations of Human Rights (DH) and International Humanitarian Law (IHL). Unfortunately, the rejections arose depending on the perpetrator. That is, the statements were generated at different times and according to the actor or group that perpetrated the violation of said norms.

For example, after the attacks perpetrated by the Syrian Government on the District of Guta Oriental, few Latin American governments pronounced themselves condemning the regime supported by Russia. Colombia and Mexico were the countries that most rejected these acts of war.

On the other hand, countries such as Bolivia, Venezuela, Cuba and, in turn, Ecuador, manifested themselves as a product of the offensive of the United States and its allies in Syria.

The above reflects the division that exists in Latin America with respect to the United States. According to Nadia Sicard, internationalist, in statements collected by W Radio, the reaction of the Latin people to the situation in Syria is conditioned by the foreign policy of each country. The ideological division in Latin America is one of the reasons that has prevented the union of the continent and the adoption of a position towards the main international problems.

The truth is that the geopolitical struggle between the United States and Russia will not stop. The position of Latin American governments is a reflection of what happens in most of the world. Nations that remain in the ideological dilemma promoted by the United States and Russia, whose objectives of increasing their sphere of influence cause the division of continents and nations.

 

LatinAmerican Post l Bryan Andrés Murcia

Translated from: 'Siria: Los rusos llegan a tomarse el poder'

 

* The opinion of the editor does not represent the average

 

Listen this article