China and Russia are reported to have rejected a proposal presented in a communique by the UN Secretary-General presented to the current penholders, Belgium and Germany. The SG has on several occasions expressed his desire to extend the free border crossing from Turkey into Idlib for 12 months. The current mandate established in 2014 (UNSCR 2165) expires on 10 July.
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called for the opening of Syria’s borders for the free flow of ‘humanitarian aid’ for one year; Syria, China, and Russia object it and consider it a breach of Syria’s sovereignty offering a secure passage for terrorists to sneak into Syria with their weapons as proven in the past.
Per reports, Russia proposed to deliver the intended humanitarian aid through Damascus, the Syrian capital, a proposal the UN’s top diplomat considered ‘not a viable applicable solution’, he might be worried that the Syrian state will confiscate any weapons, gears, and advanced satellite communication devices ‘gifted by the generous western donors’ to al-Qaeda terrorists operating in Idlib.
Resolutions — passed by the P5 Security Council members — require aye votes or a combination of ”ayes” and abstentions. UNSCR 2165 was extended with UNSCR 2393 (2017), UNSCR 2449 (2018). Its likely final extension, UNSCR 2504 (2020) passed with the French “aye,” and abstensions by US, UK, Russia, & China.
There are up to three million Syrians living in the region under the control of a number of assorted al-Qaeda and other Muslim Brotherhood terrorist groups loyal to the Turkish madman Erdogan; the real humanitarian aid delivered to Idlib falls in the hands of those terrorists who then sell it at high prices to the needy Syrian families, whereas if the Russian proposal is accepted, convoys of the aid would be delivered under the supervision of the United Nations itself and not al-Qaeda commanders.
Furthermore, what about the 18 million Syrians not living in al-Qaeda’s safe haven in Idlib and suffering from the increased sanctions imposed on them by the same ‘generous donors’ sending the aid to al-Qaeda terrorist groups in Idlib? Don’t they deserve some help instead of renewing the sanctions against them by the European Union earlier this month and the Trump regime imposing its unprecedented regime of sanctions dubbed the Caesar Act on the 17th of the month? Can the United Nations Secretary-General explain this hypocrisy under the supervision of his organization?
We know there’s no comfortable answer to this question since the UN organization was essentially built under the control of the victors of the WWII to serve their interests not to actually implement its own Charter, otherwise, there are dozens of un-implemented United Nations Security Council resolutions and other resolutions by the United Nations General Assembly to solve the Palestinian problem, the core issue destabilizing most of the world for the past 7 decades.
There is also the UNSC Resolution 2253 issued to dry up the sources of terrorism funding and facilitating, it was issued a few hours before the infamous UNSC Resolution 2254 calling for a ‘political solution for the Syrian crisis’, to enable implementing 2254, the UNSC needs to implement 2253. The United States of America and its cronies never mention Resolution 2253 while never stop calling for the implementation of Resolution 2254, they want to include elements from terrorist groups in the political solution in Syria, ie ministers in a future Syrian government from al-Qaeda… Just naming another example of the ways the UN functions.
It is noteworthy that Antonio Guterres’ humanitarian concerns for the suffering of the Syrian people — by all evidence — is limited to support for NATO countries to impose a new Sykes-Picot in Syria (maps showing that increased, non-sovereign border openings are around areas illegally occupied by Madman Erdogan and Trump regime troops, here.)
SG Guterres did not dispatch communique in condemnation of Erdogan’s bombing the electrical grid of the Alouk Water & Power plant — twice — in October; surely Syrian people need water and electricity.
There has been no communique over Turkey’s occupation of the water plant in Alouk, either, an occupation which has seen Syrians deprived of essential water for days at a time. Surely, humanitarian concerns involve Syrians not having access to their own clean water supplies.
Surely humanitarian concerns of the truly righteous would include concern for the rights of Syrians to have access to their water and their food.