Mon, 03 Oct 2016 18:09 UTC
On September 30th, 2016, the New York Times published an article entitled "Audio Reveals What John Kerry Told Syrians Behind Closed Doors" which presented a series of leaked recordings of discussions between John Kerry and Syrian opposition representatives on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly session in New York. In these leaked audio samples, Kerry is heard expressing frustration with being outmaneuvered by Russian diplomacy and nervously attempting to explain the crisis of the US's game plan for Syria in light of recent developments. In the following commentary, Russian political analyst Ruslan Ostashko explores just why this leak has appeared now and how it bears on the domestic and geopolitical situation of the US...
Anyone who follows geopolitics is periodically plagued by bouts of insatiable curiosity. One really wants to know just what is being said behind closed doors during negotiations deciding the fate of the world.
Retelling news from different sources is, of course, interesting, but not the point. And waiting for memoirs, which are filled with lies anyway, is long and boring. Sometimes we have the delight of published WikiLeaks that give us the opportunity to spy on American diplomatic mail and the results of the private conversations of American diplomats and their pocket politicians, but this is also not quite what is needed.
Very, very rare are those leaks that allow one to really see through the diplomatic smokescreen. The New York Times' leak of conversations between Kerry and representatives of the so-called Syrian opposition is one of these rare finds.
Our media have picked up only a few elements in this leak which, undoubtedly, are pleasant for us, but these are not even the most important.
Yes, during his talk with his Syrian puppets, Kerry complained of "cunning" Russian diplomats, which very much pleased the Russian foreign ministry.
Yes, Kerry acknowledged the possibility of Assad participating in presidential elections in Syria despite the State Department's official position that Assad must leave and never return to Syrian politics.
This is all very good, very nice, and really is an extra reason to point a finger at the absurdity of the official American position and make fun of American propaganda. But the most important part of this leak is something else.
Let's ask ourselves two questions: Who did this leak? Why did a top American newspaper, and not RT, first publish this incriminating recording?
Here begins to spin the quite interesting story which I have mentioned many times. We are witnessing a very intense conflict between the CIA and Pentagon or, if you wish, between the moderate and radical parts of the American elite. This conflict sometimes manifests itself in an intricate way. In this specific situation, it turns out that the leak's orchestrators aimed at Kerry, but ended up hitting the whole USA.
The most likely scenario behind the appearance of the recorded conversations is such: representatives of the Syrian opposition are very frustrated that the US never started bombing Damascus, so they decided to record talks with Kerry during which he explained that everything is bad, that the Russians have tricked him, and thus offered dozens of reasons why the "US Secretary of State has ditched the Syrian opposition and caved in to the Russians."
The New York Times as a newspaper is the official mouthpiece of the Clintonoids and all the American hawks. That it happily published this leak hints that such a position of the American diplomatic leadership is a disgrace for the US and that things were never and never could have been so bad under Clinton. As a result of this special operation, Kerry's reputation has been dealt a serious blow and the American hawks have scored extra points in the fight for influencing the minds of American citizens and the undecided part of the American elite.
All of this would be good, but the entire world is watching this showdown and drawing different conclusions. Here are the conclusions that beg themselves:
1. Now the US really wants to, but effectively cannot influence the situation in Syria. No one believes in Obama's peaceful intentions, and this means that there can only be one explanation: the Americans are afraid to engage in a real military conflict with Russia. For the Americans, this is a minus, just as it is a plus for our reputation.
2. The American elite have reached such a point in their internal confrontation that they no longer hesitate to sacrifice the interests of the country in order to spite their competitors in internal political struggles.
This is a very important milestone. From the point of view of old civilizations, such as the Chinese, this is a clear sign that the American Empire is nearing its end and should be treated accordingly.
Now the Americans are trying to arrange another media and diplomatic show around the offensive of Syrian troops and the bombing of Aleppo. They are trying to put maximum media and diplomatic pressure on Russia. But since Kerry's leaked confessions, no one will take this seriously.
The Americans have run out of tools for directly influencing the situation in Syria, and their opinion should be ignored. By spreading media and diplomatic noise, they are trying to hide the fact that they have already reconciled with the fact that Assad is going to continue to lead Syria and that the Russian army is going to continue to use Syrian bases. All that is left is to squeeze them to recognize this not only on the sidelines of the UN, but officially.
I think that our air force can handle this task.
Comment: The US is being frustrated by Russian diplomacy and is reacting in a petulant, childish way by "suspending bilateral contact": Gloves come off? US suspends bilateral contact with Russia over Syria