In general, the answer to the simple question of what the North Atlantic Alliance is exactly doing in Syria is nothing, journalist Artem Aslanyan maintains. "NATO representatives mostly criticize the Assad regime and Russian airstrikes in Syria."
The alliance lacks a comprehensive strategy towards Syria. Member states did not come up with one during NATO's latest summit in September 2014. Back then, the years-long civil war and Islamic State activities took backstage to the conflict in Ukraine.
Not much has changed since. "When it comes to Syria, NATO limits itself to monitoring missions and prefers to count on the so-called moderate opposition to counter the Syrian regime and the Islamic State," Aslanyan noted.
At the moment dozens of countries take part in the US-led coalition aimed at destroying ISIL, although its achievements are moderate.
For its part, NATO "is not willing to take responsibility for an open intervention in Syria like it happened in Libya in 2011," the journalist added. One could only hope that Libya's dire present state serves as a warning against similar actions in other nations.
The journalist offered another explanation. On the one hand, the bloc's charter prohibits meddling in internal affairs of sovereign countries, Aslanyan noted in a piece for Euronews. On the other hand, Iran, Lebanese group Hezbollah and Russia are supporting Damascus.
"Therefore, NATO's internal stance [on Syria] largely resembles a cacophony than coordinated joint efforts," he observed.
No comments:
Post a Comment