After it became clear that a UN resolution on Syria was not in the cards due to vetoes from Russia and China, many pointed to the rising specter of Syria becoming a theater of proxy conflict between various powers. A Syrian in Damascus, who could not be named for security reasons, has an Op-Ed in the Christian Science Monitor. The subheadline reads: “Syrians feel caught in a proxy power struggle among the US, Gulf states, China, and Russia – who all seem more concerned with their interests and less with democracy for all. This external fight is preventing Syrians from making vital decisions about their own internal challenges.”
The author goes through the self-serving, realpolitick of the postures of the U.S., the Gulf states, China, Russia, and even al-Qaeda and argues that Syrians see through the bullshit. I’ve explored such postures here, here, and here.
Those outside Syria genuinely interested in protecting civilians, ending the bloodshed, and facilitating Syrian self-determination would also do well to keep in mind that those inside Syria are much more than figurines to be shaken up for the sake of changing the landscape.
We know at least some elements of the Free Syrian Army have been vying for a Western-led intervention against the Assad regime, so it’s not clear how representative the view of this writer is, but this is the narrative you cannot find in the mainstream, unfortunately.
Good description. I prefer to see clearly Marcy Lu
"but this is the narrative you cannot find in the mainstream”, Every "Mainstream Media” is about government domestic and foreign policy, even the little cities have such "Mainstream Media” about the local government which is feed by that little government. NY Times nor for that matter any other censored or owned by Wall Street corporate is not going to get involved and invite "another opinionated writer or jurnalist” to write other then NY Times editor sees proper. Unless the writer opinion or even the report is in line with NY Times which in term is in Line with the government policies toward Syria or Iran and etc. Going back to Iraq war, NY Times steeped out of the journalism boundaries and become very personally opinionated regarding Saddam Hussein how brutal he was and that he might be able to kill millions of people with his WMD and etc. Look John.., when the world started having this idea in globalization the entire world become the New gladiators arena where US, Russia, China, India, EU, are fighting and killing peoples all over for what they think is theirs or they need and must have, the system of vultures' capitalism started right then and there. The system for last 60 years is at wars with almost ever nations in this world; therefore it is not “profitable" for these "Mainstream Media” to say the truth, and if they did the Wall Street will not do any advertising with them and they will go under, in another word this is another from of humiliation to those who don't work for CNN yet those like Anderson Cooper get paid for being opinionated where millions look at him and say.., he must be right, he must be informed by higher authority or by his invisible and or underground excitement sources companies from all over, he is informed by a higher authority all right, he is informed and paid by the higher authority to "keeping them honest" about their lies. Do you get it John…?
..or why would the Corporate media attack another Corporation? What can we expect from a pig but a grunt?
The system for last 60 years is at wars with almost ever nations in this world; therefore it is not “profitable" for these "Mainstream Media” to say the truth, and if they did the Wall Street will not do any advertising with them and they will go under, in another word this is another from of humiliation to those who don't work for CNN yet those like Anderson Cooper