Europe and Syria

Europe and Syria

The exodus of refugees from Africa and Asia has ripped away the mask from Europe’s humanist face. It turns out that proclaiming and preaching one’s values is not the same thing as living up to them. Unable to resolve the migrant problem, they have begun a hunt for the guilty.

As usual, fingers are pointed toward Russia, as its opponents continue their tradition of mixing the non-obvious with the truly unlikely. Russia is supporting Assad and has allegedly started a war against the «moderate opposition» for lack of anything better to do (the myth of their «moderation» was created by Washington; in Syria there are none who fit that description among those who have taken up arms and are acting against the legitimate government).

Amidst the criticism of Russia’s «unilateral» actions in Syria, not only the crimes of the so-called Islamic State (IS) are being forgotten, but also the West’s own misdeeds. The ones committed against the migrants. In Germany, for example, a refugee camp has been set up at the site of a satellite labor camp of Buchenwald, with the assumption that refugees from Algeria and Eritrea will be unable to grasp where it is they have ended up.

The miserable living conditions of the refugees in the Hungarian camp in Röszke have been captured on video. The footage, shot with a hidden camera, shows hundreds of migrants held in a fenced-in enclosure scrambling to catch sandwiches thrown to them by guards. And all the while the guards are wearing helmets and hygiene masks.

Migrants were at first admitted into Finland. But now the country resorted to «counter-propaganda» in order to frighten them away. Finland’s Yle news website posted a story on September 21 about three Iraqi migrants who claim to be deeply upset about the conditions in their host country and are preparing to return home.

* * *

In 2003, the European Union adopted a neighborhood policy that now applies to 16 countries east and south of the borders of the EU. Within that framework Brussels offers assistance, technical aid, and access to its market. But ultimately, as Carl Bildt puts it, instead of a «ring of friends», Europe finds herself surrounded by a «ring of fire», which has prompted the exodus of refugees into the EU. Why did this happen?

The problem is Europe’s lack of independence. Although it enjoys one of the world’s foremost economies, the European Union, in a military and political sense, is actually a protectorate of the United States. Not only is Europe blanketed by a network of US military bases, it is still the only place outside of the US where American tactical nuclear weapons (TNW) are permanently stationed.

The Americans are currently planning to deploy high-precision B-61-12 guided nuclear bombs in Europe, and these bombs will first be delivered to Germany. It was not so long ago that Germany was partially within the American zone of occupation. And it should not be forgotten that Americans allow the Germans to «steer Europe» as long as it does not interfere with their global geopolitical strategy and does not threaten the dominance of the dollar.

And as the Deutsche Wirtschafts Nachrichten wrote on September 13, it turns out that the majority of those seeking asylum in Europe are refugees from countries that have been caught up in bloody wars in the last 20 years – from the former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Ethiopia, and Somalia. And it was the military intervention of the US and its allies that laid the foundation of almost all of these wars. It is they who are responsible for the flood of refugees into Europe.

So in order to limit the influx of refugees, how about nipping reckless military escapades in the bud, instead of building walls along the borders of each European state? Separated from Europe by an ocean, the US is not particularly concerned about the migration crisis that has befallen the Europeans. Deutsche Wirtschafts Nachrichten claims that the American allies in the alliance must now pay for the wars unleashed by the United States.

Or it could be put even more simply: that notorious transatlantic solidarity is creating one-sided benefits for the United States but is detrimental for Europe. Once they began taking part in sanctions against Russia, Europeans became convinced of that. The refugee crisis has to prove it even more.

Thus Europe ought to rejoice that on September 30, the Russian Aerospace Defense Forces began to take decisive action against the terrorists of the so-called Islamic State (IS), an entity that – as we are now discovering – Americans solicitously patronized. But no! Germany and France have agreed with a statement from the Turkish Foreign Ministry, appealing to Moscow on behalf of seven states to halt the air strikes on the Syrian opposition and to «refocus» on the battle against Islamic militants. As if the «moderates» and «immoderates» in Syria were not fighting for the very same thing – to overthrow President Bashar al-Assad.

And incidentally, when US planes attacked a hospital in the Afghan city of Kunduz, burning patients alive, not a single European politician expressed any particular outrage!

Only the utter military defeat of the IS armed gangs and the subsequent pacification of Syria and Iraq can stem the flood of refugees that is swamping Europe. The understanding of this has already begun to take root. Demonstrations and rallies in support of Russia’s actions in Syria have been held at the Russian embassy in Paris and at the Russian consulate in Frankfurt. Russia’s policy toward Syria is supported by Marine Le Pen, the leader of the French National Front, who has argued that France should join Russia in the battle against terrorism.

Even outside Europe one can find sympathy for Russia’s actions. The Xinhua news agency posted an editorial on October 2, maintaining that «Russia is ...taking its cue from the international battle against terrorism». (Here we would like to suggest a correction to the Chinese journalists: not «taking its cue from», but rather «at the forefront of»). What’s more, Xinhua notes that «the path for Russia’s military intervention has been smoothed by the very modest successes[emphasis mine - V. N.] of the US-led international coalition there, as well as the problems the EU is having with the influx of refugees».

Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry also made an important comment. «Russia’s entrance, given its potential and capabilities, is something we see is going to have an effect on limiting terrorism in Syria and eradicating it», stated the Egyptian minister of foreign affairs on October 3, during a televised interview with Saudi Arabia’s Al Arabiya news channel.

Even America’s Newsweek magazine was forced to admit: «...Russia’s new involvement removes some of the pressure from the US to resolve the mess in Syria and Iraq alone. Despite Russia’s support for the Assad regime, Putin’s offer to create an anti-ISIS coalition is probably genuine. A de facto coalition between the US allied coalition and Russian and Iranian-backed regime forces on the ground could well be the most effective way to degrade ISIS in the long run».

* * *

As long as Europe’s elite remains ambivalent about Russia joining the fight against the so-called Islamic State, they are surrendering not only their military victory but also their dignity. Obviously, there can be no turning point here without the arrival of a new generation of European politicians, intent not upon being subordinate to a transatlantic partner, but on being part of a union of equals with Greater Eurasia.