Skip to content

People’s Daily: The Only Thing the U.S. Wants Is To Be the Dominant Power in the Middle East

People Daily published an article commenting that U.N. resolution 2118 will not be able to restrict the U.S. from taking military action against Syria in the future. The following is an excerpt from the article:

On September 27, 2013, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 2118 on the issue of Syria’s chemical weapons. This means that the U.S. will temporarily suspend its military strike against Syria. … The result did not come easily. It was not only a fight between the United States and the international peace forces, but also a contest between the U.S. and the Russian military power. However, this compromise represents only a temporary peace. The resolution also left a "back door" for the U.S. to strike Syria [in the future]. 

A U.S. military strike against Syria has the intention of accelerating the shift in strategic focus "eastward." … In order to speed up the adjustment of its strategic focus, the United States needs to accelerate its deployment of troops to shift in direction from the Middle East to the Asia Pacific. However, today the United States does not have a commanding control over the security of the Middle East. This is an important reason that restricts the United States from deploying its troops eastward. Following the removal of Saddam, Gaddafi, and other stumbling blocks, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad became the next block in the Middle East that the United States is eager to move away. "Chemical Weapons" is merely an excuse for the United States to occupy the moral high ground. 
Reading carefully, one sees that the resolution contains content allowing that the Security Council can take measures under the "UN Charter" Chapter VII in the event of non-compliance with the resolution. This is a major concession that Russia made. The United States specifically emphasized this point, implying that the U.S. has left itself a "back door" to further strike Syria [in the future]. This means that even after the destruction of the Syrian chemical weapons, the U.S. will still likely find an excuse for its military strike operations. It’s like the old Libya: after it surrendered the right to develop and produce nuclear weapons, the U.S. still overthrew the Gaddafi regime.  
In the future battle between the United States and Russia, military pressure against the Bashar al-Assad regime will be the U.S.’s determined policy. Syria’s chemical weapons will be the main theme for the battle. The U.S. will likely continue to seek other moral justification for war. Russia and others in the international community may use the tactics of "an eye for an eye [letting them have a taste of their own medicine]." That is, using the grounds that Syrian has given up its chemical weapons, they may support Syria with international public opinion to curb the possibility of the United States taking military action. 
Source: People’s Daily, October 2, 2013