It is the same old game that always gets repeated: superpowers negotiating on behalf of weak countries and peoples; deciding their fate and the shape of their government; setting up the right president; removing one official and bringing in another; defining geographical borders; deciding who the enemy is and who the friend is; setting up alliances; generously arming one side so that it can defend itself while depriving another of armament... all of this in the name of humanity and international law. All eyes are now turned towards Geneva – towards Lavrov and Kerry. The fate of the Syrian people, and of the peoples of the entire region, hangs in the balance, waiting for them to agree or disagree. The first represents Syria the regime, its domestic and foreign allies. The second represents the "revolution", its affiliates, and its allies. The fact of the matter is that they are both doing their best to obtain the largest possible share of the cake of oil and geostrategic interests, and ensure holding influence through a "friendly" government or regime that would protect those interests and guarantee their continuity. The two sides could have begun these negotiations over a year ago, but they had both been wagering on the victory of one side of the Syrian conflict over the other. They had both been providing financial and political support, as well as armament, to their respective allies. The United States was wagering on the "revolutionaries" to expand its influence and to break the back of the alliance stretching from Iran to Lebanon. Meanwhile, Russia, making a strong comeback on the international scene, was wagering on the cohesiveness of this alliance, which disrupts the international balance of power. Its ambition is to regain the role once played by the Soviet Union. Putin is its new czar, playing the role that had been that of the Communist Party with all of its institutions. As for the issue of chemical weapons and the tragedy the Syrian people is going through, they are merely cards in the game, used by the United States as a cover for its ambitions, which it does not even hide, as it tirelessly attempts to convince the world of their legitimacy. But President Obama's administration has failed to convince Americans that striking against Syria would achieve those ambitions. The people were more realistic than the administration. They have learned from past experiences, for which they paid the price in trillions of dollars and thousands of soldiers killed, and in a substantial part of their freedom, security, and stability. During his intensive campaign to convince the American people and Congress of the necessity to grant him the authority to strike against Syria, Obama quoted one American citizen who had written to him, saying that we are "still recovering from our involvement in Iraq". Obama added that "a veteran put it more bluntly: ‘This nation is sick and tired of war.' My answer is simple: I will not put American boots on the ground in Syria. I will not pursue an open-ended action like Iraq or Afghanistan. I will not pursue a prolonged air campaign like Libya or Kosovo. This would be a targeted strike to achieve a clear objective: deterring the use of chemical weapons, and degrading Assad's capabilities". Obama's speech has been described as weak and full of contradictions. The speech was weak, because the speaker was hesitant. He does not want war, but he is driven to it in order to save face. He had set red lines which Assad crossed, and must now carry out his threats. The speech was contradictory, because he wants to deal the regime a finishing blow, but is not confident of the reactions to this. He wants to topple the regime, but does not seek to strike at the army gathered around it. This is why he backed down and laid the burden on Congress. He resorted to negotiating with the Russians. Indeed, the game for him is not a game about revolution, resistance, and freedoms, but rather one of interests and influence. Let the Syrians then pay the price. Let them kill each other until they are all exhausted and the fruit falls from the tree. As for Russia, all it cares about now is to emerge from this war as a second superpower, whether Assad stays or goes. It is not in the name of the Syrians that the Russians and the Americans are negotiating. And it is not in our name, we the Arabs, who have placed our fate in their hands. We must accept the results as they are, while waiting for a second revolution.
