Putin: Assad Ready To Share Power With Opposition

At the Russian economic forum held in the Far Eastern city of Vladivostok, Vladimir Putin said that Pres. Assad is ready to hold snap parliamentary elections and to share power with an opposition. I know that Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov has been holding meetings for the past two months between Iran, Syria, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the Syrian opposition, with the hope of coming to some kind of an agreement to thwart Washington's impositions of breaking the country apart.

The sticking point is Assad. Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the opposition insist he goes, and Russia insists he stays. Russia feels it's a problem that can only be solved when the foreign terrorists are kicked out, and the refugees are able to go back home.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Friday that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is ready to hold snap parliamentary elections and could share power with a "healthy" opposition.

Russia, along with Iran, has been Assad's principle international ally in the war that has raged in Syria for four-and-a-half years and has claimed a quarter of a million lives.

Moscow has made clear it does not want to see Assad toppled and has seized on gains made by Islamic State in Syria and Iraq to urge his foreign foes, including the United States and Saudi Arabia, to work with Damascus to combat the common enemy.

"We really want to create some kind of an international coalition to fight terrorism and extremism," Putin told journalists on the sidelines of the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok, saying he had spoken to U.S. President Barack Obama on the matter.

"We are also working with our partners in Syria. In general, the understanding is that this uniting of efforts in fighting terrorism should go in parallel to some political process in Syria itself," Putin said.

"And the Syrian president agrees with that, all the way down to holding early elections, let's say, parliamentary ones, establishing contacts with the so-called healthy opposition, bringing them into governing," he said.​

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/04/us-russia-forum-putin-extremism-idUSKCN0R408L20150904

 

The Russians have once again stepped in to help solve the problem ! The other recent example is the Iran nuke negotiations.

Interesting

 

if you will take a look to Syrian map today you will fine that the problem in Syria now is not Assad and opposition. The Syrian regime and oppositions controlling less than 25% of all Syrian land.

 

Yup.

Putin to the rescue of world peace again.

What a man.

Too bad we don't have anyone like him in the US.

Obama never got into posing with lions and tigers...hmmmmm.....

 

I'm sure this will work. Superpowers have an excellent track record of fixing the Middle East.

 

They don't want to be fixed; they just want to kill each other.

 

A terrific move by Putin on the grand chessboard!!!
I love it!

 

Abbas lost power long ago.
Syria is now occupied by Iran.
Backing Assad means backing Iran.
And backing ISIS at the very same time.
See
http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/why-obama-is-isil-dream-recruiter/

 

Sharing power with those terrorists is a betrayal of the Syrian people.
It seems the Russians still have a mental defect just like the one where they consented to "sharing power" in Libya. Result: destroyed country that once was Libya.
Bad, bad, move if Syrians buy into that garbage.

 

What strikes me is the complete breakdown in the idea of democracy and the concept of international law. If Assad is prepared to hold parliamentary elections and abide by the results then that alone should be good enough. Who gave Saudi, Qatar and even the US the right to say who should be a head of state in a sovereign nation? The very idea is alien to international law, but today we see it as the norm.

But why should this be a one way street I wonder? Maybe Russia and China should consider seeking to depose Obama or one of the bought and paid for political slime-balls who follow in his footsteps after the next US elections? Who could argue with their logic if they did so?

 

Opposition?

Do you mind ISIS 2.0?

 

At the end of the day, all those years of fighting boil down to one thing - the pipeline. If Assad had agreed with Qatar-Turkey pipeline he would've been praised as the most democratic leader in the Middle East. U.S foreign policy makers never liked the leaders who showed them two fingers.


Putin: Assad Would "Accept" Snap Elections To Avoid "Total Chaos"
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-09-04/putin-assad-would-accept-snap-elections-avoid-total-chaos

 

It's called Blowback. And it's is always the problem with surreptitiously supporting religious zealots for short term gains. In other words you reap what you sow.

 

There are some in the US (of Political figures) that have been making some sense. Unfortunately these have been drowned out by the cacophony of the Partisan.

I have never liked Buchanan much but give credit where credit is due. You can watch him give Hannity a serious beat down here. If you want a more detailed analysis you can find on his website.

http://crooksandliars.com/2015/04/watch-pat-buchanan-school-hannity-iran

 

Yes.

Sadaam got himself killed by claiming to have more weaponry than he did, and Iran almost triggered a war with the US by doing the same thing.

Our neocon leaders are so war mad they will take any pretext to start war; the claim of superior arms by a weaker power should be a disincentive but it is the reverse.

Obama has been trying to save Iran from itself.

 

Obama is a puppet of the Oligopoly -Bureaucracy - Political fusion monster just like his predecessors. The Geopolitics of the middle east and "Nato/Russia" is such that the US is losing its influence in the region. Syria of course is a client state of Russia and Iran is not far behind. With the crisis in Ukraine the gloves came off and there is little chance of maintaining many of the sanctions against Iran if Russia stops playing ball.

In addition Europe and China were starting to balk at the sanctions. Since regime change Iran had "NOT" been acting as a state sponsor of terror like in the past.

One of the "necessary illusions" and big elephants in the room is that the US can not just attack Iran unilaterally without risking serious consequences. It must get permission (or at least tacit agreement) from the Russia to attack Iran in order to avoid serious consequences.

The third factor is that waging war on Iran is orders of magnitude more problematic than Iraq. Iraq had no modern military equipment. Iraq's military was decimated in Iraq war I and there had been sanctions on Iraq from after the war to the time Bush went in the second time. Iraq was fighting back with 1970 equipment and they did not even make much use of that.

Oh Sure ... The US can overwhelm Iran but at what cost? Iraq nearly broke the bank. A war with Iran is not going to be cheap. Further there is a heavy geopolitical cost should Russia not agree.

 

Putin has very few moves.. Russia has little money since the price of oil headed south.

 

Russia has been working with the legitimate Syrian opposition to attain peace in Syria. You're thinking of the foreign terrorists that Washington works with to keep the war going on and on until Syria is emptied out of its people. That way the country can be broken into parts under Washington's control.

Human misery and lives mean nothing to them...only thing of importance is power and greed. Well they are sociopaths you know?

 

Actually the drop in oil has been balanced by the drop in the Ruble. It gives Russia a competitive edge over Western nations and not only in arms and high tech. According to Bloomberg Russia's wheat exports will soon overtake the US...and this is just the beginning. Soon it will be exporting other foods as well...and one thing's for sure, their foods won't be killing us.

One should never underestimate the determination of people who have always been an empire, and which has suffered attacks by an envious West, for nigh up to a thousand years.

Washington should have known this, but excessive arrogance can create very stupid people

 

Bashar al Assad interview 2011

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yL9h9vSOHDk

Ghadaffi died in October of 2011.

 

The West has never envied Russia.. Look at their history.

 

I don't know about envy but the West has had a lust for Russia's resources at various times, the most notable being Hitlers invasion of Russia to get oil.

 

If Russia wasn't envied, then why was it being attacked by the West every fifty years for one thousand years? Only in the last century it was attacked by Germany, and then robbed by Western financed Bolsheviks, and then attacked by Germany again for its land. Then when the Soviet Union broke up, it was robbed of all its natural resources by western supported criminals like Khodorovsky..

For me its envy... either that or fear of the power Russia will have because of its immense wealth. ..especially since they refuse to bow to the 'superiority' of our western standards. Anyway there will always be a rationale for the attacks and the greed.

 

I don't know about the oil, because it's doubtful they would have been able to get that far inland. What I do know is that Germany didn't have enough food for its large population, so it really needed land. Ukraine and Western Russia have the black earth, which is considered the richest land in the world. This is why the Russians were being exterminated. .

 

Hitler want to control all the oil from the Caspian to the Persian Gulf.. He called it Operation something or other.. Small burp in my memory.

Nobody else covets Russia's resources... or envies Russians.. The poor in Russia are poorer than the poor in India... and the same crooked, corrupt Russian communists are now just crooked, corrupt capitalists.. Putin takes a piece of everything.. He's amassed 40 billion dollars in the past 20 years.