THE FINAL LINE

Syria is in a state of civil war. This sad fact was noted by a spokesman for the United Nations. Lasting more than a year, the confrontation between the regime of Bashar al-Assad and the opposition has led to more than 10,000 deaths. About 230,000 have become refugees, while nearly a million Syrians are in need of urgent humanitarian assistance. But apparently, this is not the full list of troubles that await the country, which is in the midst of an armed conflict between the forces aiming to seize power and a regime trying all means to keep power in Syria, a country which was regarded as one of the most advanced countries in the Arab world until recently.

The echo of Al-Kubeyr

The fact that the situation in Syria is finally getting out of control and is completely immersed in the abyss of civil war is proven by the massacre in the town of Al-Kubeyr in the province of Hama, in which about 100 people, including women and children, were killed. The opposition National Council of Syria and the West, which is behind it, accused Damascus of having committed this bloody campaign. The latter, meanwhile, denied any involvement in the massacres and blamed them on the armed opposition, which the Syrian regime calls nothing other than "terrorist groups".

A few days after the tragedy in Al-Kubeyr, the first real clash between the government forces and armed groups that advocate the overthrow of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad took place in Damascus. As a result of nearly twelve hours of fighting, over 50 civilians were killed in the capital.

Thus, UN envoy Kofi Annan's peace plan, which the Syrian government and opposition had pledged to implement, can be considered failed. Moreover, the only acceptable peace plan under the current conditions was disrupted not only by internal developments in Syria and the exacerbating confrontation between the authorities and the opposition, but also by external factors.

At another meeting of the "Friends of Syria" in Istanbul on 6 June, the group of countries that advocate regime change in Syria approved an appeal to the international community to agree to additional sanctions against the government of Bashar al-Assad in order to force him to hand over power to the opposition. But what is even more remarkable (since the demand of the West and its Middle Eastern allies for the resignation of the Syrian president is not new in itself) is that the "Friends of Syria" also stated their intention to create a special group to assist the Syrian opposition.

Important decisions concerning the further promotion of the anti-Assad campaign are likely to be taken at the next meeting of the foreign ministers of the "Friends of Syria", which is scheduled for 6 July in Paris. The Foreign Ministry of France - the host country of the forthcoming forum - has issued a statement on its readiness to bring together "all states and organizations that want to support the Syrian people in the deteriorating humanitarian and security situation and in the continuing repression."

In view of the West's tougher stance on "the Syrian issue", the essence of which lies in enforcing the change of the Syrian leadership, the likelihood of external military intervention in domestic Syrian affairs has increased significantly. The US has long openly made it clear that if necessary, they can begin to use force against the al-Assad regime, bypassing the UN Security Council, which, in view of the "blocking" views of Russia and China, is not yet able to adopt a resolution authorizing a hard-line approach to the "Syrian issue".

The new French president, Francois Hollande, for his part, also pointed to the desirability of military intervention as a way of resolving the crisis in Syria. The seriousness of tensions is proved by the fact that a number of countries - France, Germany, Great Britain, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, Canada, Japan and Turkey - followed the United States and advised the Syrian ambassadors to leave the territory of these states.

However, it is impossible to create an idyllic picture of anti-Assad sentiment in the global community due to the different view of individual states, primarily the same Russia and China, which insist on the inadmissibility of foreign military intervention in the Syrian conflict. The Russian factor appears to prevail in this case, as Moscow is clearly perceived in the West as a force allied with the al-Assad regime. It is no accident that now that the West has decided to act against al-Assad without regard for Russia's opinion, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton accused Moscow of sending military helicopters to the Syrian army. "The Russians assure us from time to time that we do not have to worry that their supplies to Syria may influence the escalation of the conflict. But this is not true," the US secretary of state said.

Meanwhile, Mrs Clinton's Russian counterpart Sergey Lavrov bluntly declares that Russia intends to fully meet contracts to supply air defence systems to Syria. The Russian foreign minister stressed that the Russian weaponry supplied to Syria cannot be used against peaceful demonstrators even "with the greatest imagination", as these air defence systems "can be used only if Syria is attacked from outside". As for "the sending of military helicopters", Moscow rejects the existence of other supplies to Syria except for air defence systems.

Concerning the essence of "the Syrian issue", Russia proceeds from the need to put pressure on all parties to the conflict in Syria, including the opposition.

"Moscow will support the resignation of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad if so agreed by the Syrians themselves," said Lavrov. In addition, Russia calls for an urgent international conference on Syria, which should facilitate the implementation of Annan's plan, and most importantly, involve Iran in the conference as a country that "has an influence on the Syrian government", Apparently, in light of the Iranian factor, Lavrov also gave a very clear message that Russia cannot allow the UN Security Council to authorize military intervention in Syria, so that this country does not become a "testing area of war for supremacy within the Islamic world".

The last reference is not accidental. For it is very obvious that the military action against Syria being prepared by the West is also part of a broad anti-Iranian campaign. This scenario is also reflected in the growing contradictions between Iran on the one hand, and Washington's Arab allies on the other. The latter include, first of all, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Bahrain, which are in the vanguard of the anti-Assad policy within the League of Arab States.

As for the prospects of Iran's participation in the Syrian settlement proposed by Russia, it is clear that the West will not agree with this approach. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has already rejected the proposal to hold a meeting in Syria with the participation of Iran. The French Foreign Ministry said: "The Iranian regime still supports Bashar al-Assad and the bloody repression against his people, so it cannot be associated with the settlement of the Syrian crisis."

Fault line

Despite the enormous importance of external factors in the development of the Syrian crisis, domestic reasons are still dominant. And here we see the deepening of the fault line between the regime and the armed opposition, expressing the interests and sentiments of most of the protesting Syrian society. Another thing is that in Syria, just like it happened in Qaddafi's Libya recently, the rebels are counting on Western military assistance to overthrow the ruling regime. The tactics of the opposition Syrian Free Army is to constantly increase its military activity and persuade the "Friends of Syria" of its ability to strike al-Assad's regime from behind. And if the government is severely suppressing the actions of the armed opposition, it ultimately plays into the hands of the latter. Because that way world public opinion fully forms a picture of the repressed rebel and opposition-minded part of the Syrian people, who need to be defended by the West and its allies.

Thus, the threat of foreign invasion of Syria now seems more significant than ever. Despite the obvious difficulties in implementing the Western plan to overthrow al-Assad and spread the "Arab spring" to one of the most strategically important Middle Eastern countries from a geopolitical point of view (even if Syria has no energy resources like Iraq and Libya), the "Friends of Syria" led by the United States are determined to implement this scenario. The main obstacle is not even the position of Russia and China, but considerable support for al-Assad's policy within Syria itself. There is no evidence yet that at least part of the political and economic elite of the country - an indispensable attribute of military campaigns implemented by the US and NATO in the East in recent years - are ready to renounce the dictator president.

Another problem for Western strategists is that in order to support the Syrian insurgents, NATO forces will have to conduct land operations. After all, the fighting between the government and opposition forces is currently taking place mainly in the mountainous regions of Syria. With air strikes alone, it will be very difficult for the Western coalition to ensure the movement of armed opposition members towards Damascus. It is also possible that if the West launches a military campaign, al-Assad's regime will receive direct military aid from Iran and the Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah. In this context, Russia steps back, of course: all talk of Moscow's possible military involvement on the side of Damascus seems untenable, since the Russian political elite, whose economic and ideological interests are tied to the West, will not dare to throw down the gauntlet to the latter, especially because of a country that is not directly included in the Kremlin's sphere of influence.

All of the abovementioned constraints will be taken into account, but will not affect the decision in favour of the war on the part of the powerful global centres that have already presented Bashar al-Assad with a "black mark". However, given the real prospects for an anti-Syrian campaign, the region and the world will have to bear in mind that the military action may last much longer than the fall of the Libyan Jamahiriya took. However, the outcome of the resistance offered by the al-Assad regime is likely a foregone conclusion. Therefore, the people of the region have to seriously think what kind of future the modern creators of world history have prepared for them and how it matches the genuine interests and aspirations of these peoples themselves. The answer to this question is difficult also because the previous experiments of overthrowing dictators in some Arab countries (such as Saddam Hussein in Iraq, Hosni Mubarak in Egypt, Muammar Qaddafi in Libya) do not give grounds for confidence that the tyranny will not be replaced by an even greater tyranny or, worse, by chaos that is not only able to put an end to stability in the countries of the victorious "Arab Revolution", but also threatens the territorial unity and even the very existence of these states.