HOSTAGES TO THE "HAWKS"

Developments concerning Syria are becoming increasingly dramatic. The latest "revolutionary" crisis in the Middle East occurred immediately after the West's unsuccessful attempt to have a package of sanctions against Damascus adopted by the UN Security Council.

In the spirit of "confrontational philosophy"

A draft resolution prepared by France, Germany, Portugal and the UK was blocked by Russia and China which stated that a repetition of the Libyan scenario, i.e. external military intervention in a domestic confrontation, was unacceptable. According to the Russian ambassador to the UN, Vitaliy Churkin, the draft resolution was built on "confrontational philosophy", was lopsided and reflected an accusatory bias against the Syrian authorities.

The position of Moscow and Beijing was sharply criticized by the United States and European Union countries. "The people of Syria, who seek nothing more than the opportunity to achieve their universal human rights and to see their aspirations for freedom and liberty achieved, have been slapped in the face by several members of this Security Council today. The people of Syria and the whole region could determine who among us stand with the people of the region in their quest for a better future, and who will go to whatever lengths are necessary to defend dictators who are on the warpath," said the US ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton even urged China and Russia to explain to the people of Syria their decision to use the veto in the Security Council.

However, as the course of events shows, the failure of the anti-Syrian resolution at the UN Security Council does not rule out the probability of a scenario that is unacceptable to Russia and China because of their own geopolitical and economic interests in the Middle East. Determination to put any possible pressure on Bashar al-Assad's regime has been seriously voiced by Turkey, which is supported in this cause by the USA and EU. A statement by Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu on Ankara's readiness for any "necessary measures" against Syria shows that the "Arab spring" can provoke a major geopolitical cooling throughout the Near East and have major implications not only for Ankara and Damascus.

Erdogan vs al-Assad 

Only a few months ago Ankara and Damascus were on friendly terms. However, the growing dissent in Syria, consistent with the events of the "Arab spring" that opened up the attractive prospect for Turkey of becoming a role model for the entire Islamic world, set the two countries against each other.

Ankara has stepped up its offensive on Damascus on the diplomatic, economic, military and political fronts. On the one hand, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has said that Ankara will seek the adoption of sanctions against Syria despite the Russian and Chinese veto in the Security Council. On the other, Turkey has unilaterally tightened its own economic sanctions against Damascus and announced the termination of military cooperation with the al-Assad regime, which, inter alia, envisages the introduction of an embargo on arms sales to Syria. In addition, Turkey has launched large-scale military exercises near the border with Syria, which is when the above statement by Ahmet Davutoglu was made.

Prime Minister Erdogan explained Ankara's actions by saying that "one cannot sit idly by, watching what is happening in Syria, where defenceless and innocent people are killed on a mass scale". At the same time, Davutoglu's department sees the exercises of the Turkish armed forces as a response to Syrian operations to capture renegade soldiers who are trying to cross into Turkey. By and large, Ankara's desire to settle scores with Syria stems from fears that Turkey will also be affected by the civil war in Syria. Turkey will expect shocks and not just because hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees may pour into its territory. Things may lead to the disintegration of Syria, which apparently is what the West wants. This is confirmed by the stress on the Sunni-Shiite differences in the propaganda war against Damascus, the fact that Syria is controlled by an Alawite minority and the alleged creation of another Kurdish autonomy (similar to the one established in northern Iraq after the overthrow of Saddam Hussein).

All this, of course, is not in the interests of Ankara, which has therefore decided to be directly involved in unravelling the Syrian knot. And Erdogan's government is not deterred by the fact that it is actually playing on the side of the West. "Some countries claim that Turkey is acting with the consent of the West, but it is not the case because Turkey pursues an independent policy," Davutoglu said.

In the context of this policy, Turkey has granted asylum to the leaders of the Syrian opposition. A so-called Syrian National Council has been formed in Istanbul, which has declared that "it will represent the interests of the Syrian revolution" both domestically and abroad. Damascus has warned the international community against recognizing the council, threatening "harsh measures". Ankara, of course, seems undeterred by such threats, especially given the discontent over Turkish policies on the part of a close ally of the al-Assad regime, Iran.

Tehran outraged

Tehran accuses Ankara of playing a double game. A senior Iranian cleric, Ayatollah Naser Shirazi, said, "We did not expect Turkey to display pride and act against Syria. Turkey must know that harm caused to Syria will rebound against itself. Those driven by pride usually know nothing about fate and sleep calmly, but they must remember that one day trouble will knock on their doors."

Similar statements have been made by a number of Iranian officials. In particular, the assistant to the supreme leader of the Islamic Republic, Seyed Yahya Safavi, did not rule out the possibility that "Turkish-Iranian relations may go sour. Turkey has pursued a wrong policy towards Iran. If it does not change it, it will run into problems in domestic and foreign policy."

Iran was particularly hacked off by Turkish military exercises near the border with Syria and Ankara's consent to the stationing of an element of the US missile defence system on Turkish territory. According to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Ankara's decision is aimed at protecting the "Zionist regime" because "Israel needs guarantees that in case of military action against Iran, our missiles cannot reach Israeli territory."

Tehran is aware that a possible overthrow of its closest ally, Bashar al-Assad, threatens to deprive Iran of its resources to influence the whole of Middle Eastern politics. But it is also evident that the future unfolding of the conflict in the Turkey-Syria-Iran triangle is in the interests of the USA and the rest of the West, which is ready to use any opportunity to step up pressure on the Islamic Republic in its efforts to obtain nuclear status.

Threat of the first missile 

One way or another, the Syrian crisis is moving toward its climax. And a growing number of Syrian officials are wondering how to act in a situation where the threat of war hangs over al-Assad and the whole country like a sword of Damocles. The reaction of official circles and prominent religious figures suggests that Damascus is going to resist change to the bitter end. Moreover, Syrian radicals are ready to jump into the fight as soon as necessary. Thus, influential mufti Ahmad Hasun has even threatened Europe and the USA with terrorist attacks if Syria is exposed to aggression. According to him, "as soon as the first missile lands in our country, our Syrian brothers and sisters living in Europe, the USA and Israel will be glad to become martyrs on your territory."

Earlier, it was reported that in a conversation with the Turkish foreign minister President Assad said that if NATO begins military action against his country, Syria will fire hundreds of missiles on Israel and urge the Lebanese movement Hezbollah to take similar action. But then it turned out that the Syrian president did not say anything of the kind. The Syrian Foreign Ministry described this report as "falsification and disinformation", showing the "incredible scale and ferocity of the aggressive campaign being waged against Syria".

Meanwhile, this incident only confirms that the Syrian crisis has reached a dangerous point. In any case, it clearly indicates that the media war between the parties as a prelude to a possible real war has entered its culminating phase. There is no doubt that the West is in a hurry to replace the refractory Syrian authorities before it is deemed necessary to proceed to reprisals against Iran. According to American intelligence, Iran can get access to nuclear weapons in 2013. So there is little time left to clear the "way" towards Iran, but there is a stumbling block in the form of the al-Assad regime. Will regional countries and the international community have the wisdom to prevent new wars that threaten to explode and plunge the Middle East into chaos, or will they follow the script written by the "hawks" in the silence of government offices of the "interested states"?