... become “the largest Al-Qaeda safe haven since 9/11.” It is imperative to weed out those who continue to supply the Syrian and Russian positions with advanced armed UAVs, whose spare parts come from “third countries.” It is clear that this situation ... ... threaten Damascus with devastating massive strikes should al-Assad “stage a bloodbath in Idlib.” The allegations about the Syrian Army’s planned use of chemical weapons in the offensive against Idlib are intended exclusively to disguise the militants’ imminent acts of provocation ...
... every veto usually causes a
storm of criticism from those who are on the opposite side. This is true in the
case of the JIM mandate decision, as demonstrated when the US Ambassador Nikki
Haley allowed her emotions to run high enough to
state
that “Russia
accepts the use of chemical weapons in Syria.” This is obviously more than an
exaggeration as Russia is extremely consistent with its chemical disarmament
background and a participant of all relevant conventions and international agreements.
Russia began its chemical demilitarization in ...
... Medvedev in 2010 at a time when ‘reset’ appeared, for a time, to be working.
Recent events — both in Salisbury and in Syria — also show the vital importance that now needs to be given to restoring the credibility of the Chemical Weapons Convention.
Beyond these specific agreements, both of our countries face a range of common threats, for example ... ... on these will serve our common interest in countering these problems and provide security for our peoples.
Relations between Russia and the UK have taken a hard knock from recent events. It is not going to be easy to repair the damage that has been done....
On February 6, RIAC members held a round table discussion at the International Multimedia Center "Rossiya Segodnya " under the framework of «Chemical weapons in Syria: Russia's position and the new US accusations» the format allowed for a contextual review of both internal Syrian and international reactions, political postures and a set of technical conditions around the use of chemical weapons.
On February 6, RIAC ...
... experts put the blame on the Syrian army. However, the
official report
, which was released in September 2013 after the UN investigation was complete, did not contain any confirmations that Syrian regime was responsible for the attack.
Back in 2013 Russia and the U.S. came up with the delicate plan which made Syria to join OPCW and get rid of its chemical weapons stockpiles. By 2016 this mission was accomplished, although accusations of Syrian government using chemical weapons are still here.
REUTERS/Carlos Barria
Senior advisor Steve Bannon stands
between U.S. Deputy National Security
Advisor ...
... this remark that if President Assad were to agree give up chemical weapons, then the United States wouldn’t use force. Then, Russia quickly produced this chemical weapons proposal.
We aren’t looking for any credit. Indeed, the presidents of Russia and the United States discussed this threat of chemical weapons in Syria in Los Cabos in June of last year on the margins of the G-20 summit in Mexico. They agreed that the biggest threat to peace and security was an eventuality when chemical weapons might get into the hands of terrorists. When they met again, at the ...
... well short of a victory for America and the West. Lacking any concrete threat of force for non-compliance, it could be used by Syria’s bloody dictator, Bashar al-Assad, to deceive the global community and hold on to his gases nonetheless.
When Russian officials announced their plan for the Syrian government to hand over its chemical weapons stockpiles to the UN for destruction, thus averting an American punitive strike, everybody agreed that it had to be given a chance. Hailed by Russia’s press as a “diplomatic coup”, it did seem a comfortable solution ...
