You may say I’m being alarmist, but I say this is the beginning of the endgame, and the Jews have won it, because the inevitable NATO invasion of Syria “to protect the humanitarian relief convoys” will enable them to neutralise Hezbollah’s missile threat to Israel. They will cut the supply chain from Iran to Hezbollah, which is essential to replenish Hezbollah’s fuel stores. Once Hezbollah is neutralised by lack of fuel, Usrael can start to invade Iran with impunity, because Iran will no longer have its essential retaliatory threat, via Hezbollah’s missiles, to respond with – RB
UNSC authorizes cross-border aid access in Syria
Michelle Nichols, James Dalgleish, Jonathan Oatis, Toni Reinhold, Reuters, Jul 14 2014
NEW YORK – The UNSC on Monday authorized humanitarian access without Syrian government consent into rebel-held areas at four border crossings from Turkey, Iraq and Jordan, even though Syria has warned it deems such deliveries incursions into its territory. Luxembourg’s UN Ambassador Sylvie Lucas told the 15-member UNSC after the vote on the resolution, which was drafted by Luxembourg, Australia and Jordan:
The consent of the Syrian authorities will no longer be necessary.
The unanimously adopted resolution established for 180 days a monitoring mechanism for loading aid convoys in neighboring countries, which will notify Syria of the “humanitarian nature of these relief consignments.” The UN has said that about 10.8 million people in Syria need help, of which 4.7 million are in hard-to-reach areas. At least 150,000 people have died in Syria’s civil war, which is now in its fourth year. Usaian Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power accused the Syrian government of using denial of aid as “another weapon in its cruel and devastating arsenal against opposition-held areas.” Syria’s government warned the UNSC last month that delivering aid across borders into opposition-held areas without its consent would amount to an attack. Syrian Ambassador to the UN Bashar Ja’afari told the council after Monday’s vote:
The Syrian Government counts on a neutral, effective and responsible role of the UN in dealing with the humanitarian situation in Syria, especially in terms of respecting Syrian sovereignty.
The resolution also authorizes aid deliveries across conflict lines. The UNSC acted on Monday because of the failure of a resolution it adopted in February demanding rapid, safe and unhindered aid access in Syria. Australian UN Ambassador Gary Quinlan told the UNSC:
The humanitarian situation in Syria has actually worsened. Damascus has pursued a calculated policy of arbitrary denial of desperately needed humanitarian relief.
Syrian Coalition rep to the UN Najib Ghadbian said in a statement:
The Syrian Coalition and our partner on the ground the FSA stand ready to facilitate safe, direct access in the liberated areas under our control.
The UN said in April that to deliver aid across borders without government consent it would need a Chapter 7 resolution, giving the council authority to enforce decisions with economic sanctions or military force. But diplomats said the UN Office of Legal Affairs believes Monday’s resolution is strong enough to allow the UN cross-border aid access without approval from Damascus. Russia has made clear it would block a Chapter 7 resolution. Russia and China have vetoed four resolutions threatening action against the Syrian government. The new resolution allows aid deliveries across al-Yarubiyah on the Iraq border, al-Ramtha from Jordan and Bab al-Salam and Bab al-Hawa from Turkey. The Turkish posts cross into territory held by ISIS, which in the past month has seized swathes of Iraq and Syria. Ja’afari said that ISIS had displaced millions of Syrians and Iraqis. He told the council:
Ending terrorism is a prerequisite for ending the suffering of the Syrians.
Russian Ambassador to the Vitaly Churkin told the UNSC that aid deliveries could only be made under UN guiding principles for humanitarian relief, which “means that the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Syria would be firmly complied with.” Russia, backed by China, supported the resolution after more than a month of negotiations. Key to winning their votes was weakening a threat of further measures such as sanctions if warring parties did not comply. The language was watered down to say the council “affirms” rather than “decides” that it will “take further measures in the event of non-compliance.” The UNSC would need to agree a second resolution to impose punishments. Western diplomats said the resolution was not as ambitious as the initial text, which demanded blanket cross-border access.
Niqnaq 
7 Comments
What I find strange about this, and which is not very clear from the Reuters story above, is that Salafis control three of the four border crossings and IS is actively pressing for control of the fourth. The day before yesterday Somini Sengupta wrote, http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/14/world/middleeast/bid-to-deliver-aid-to-syria-may-set-stage-for-a-un-clash.html: “Of the four crossings, three have been in control of militant groups like the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria and the Islamic Front. ISIS is fighting for control of the fourth.”
Does this mean that the UN has a working relationship with Islamic State? How can these huge aid convoys be safe from the death-dispensing marauding of IS? It makes no sense, unless one accepts that Islamic State is a Western-backed deceit.
I feel sure I covered that earlier story, several days ago, with one of my usual sarcastic headlines, and I warned my tiny coterie of readers that this would be exactly the same in effect as a “Chapter 7 Resolution.” It’s just weasel wording.
But anyway, I agree with the inference you draw. ISIS will pretend to attack the aid convoys, so as to bring in the NATO troops to “safeguard” them. It’s all so obvious, once you make the essential epistemological jump of saying that all the Jihadi groups are fake.
Could be Russia wants the same in Ukraine ? … but yes surprised they agreed to this over the objections of the Syrians, either Putin caved to his masters or wants something in return.
Note there are more border crossings. These 4 are just the ones controlled by the fake opposition. For example Kessab is back under Syrian control.
From what I read in your quoted text there are plenty of rooms for “friendly help”, so Russian peacekeepers might be invited by Syrian government. Might that induce NATO forces on behalf of Free Syrian Army which is NOT a legal government? I dunno (but who cares UNSC, yep, Russians and China, two stupid countries according to Paul Graig Roberts). Anyway, evidently Russia either bartered something for something, or she found sorta excuse for entering her troops into Middle East. As you recall Russia trained for the role her best parachute units. And having the possibility, Russia could exchange it for something important.
On the other hand, “our” experience with Russia in UNSC is negative – every time RF agreed to “weakened” resolutions it was outmanoeuvered by the West. Plus the facts the ISIS is on the Syrian ground and some FSA units deserted to ISIS, it is hard to predict possible outcomes.
In good bad times of CCCP there was Mr. Nyet in UNSC who had invented very efficient mean to counter US capitalists tricks. 🙂
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gromyko
But CCCP was a colossus on legs of steel, not knee jerking wimp which has problems even with a fake, bankrupt country as Ukraine, which came into being 20+ years ago for only one purpose – to be raped and robbed by few Israeli Jews.
I could imagine a deal along the lines of :
(a) NATO will enter soon enough, “to protect the humanitarian relief effort”;
(b) Its real purpose will be to cut Hezbollah supply lines, comprehensively (there will be a parallel effort in Lebanon, no doubt);
(c) In return, we will promise to leave you undisturbed in Tartus. Yeah, well – given the threats to Sevastopol, that’s hardly credible, but when has incredibility ever got in the way of “secret assurances” before?
It is hard to believe that Russia got steamrollered here. The U.S. has been trying to get these humanitarian corridors mandated as soon as the ink was dry on the chemical weapons deal. Would Russia barter away the territorial integrity of Syria? Probably. It is a done deal after all anyway, isn’t it? The caliphate is rising. I would take the deal — not to say that this is the deal — where I got everything west if the Euphrates.
Not to obsequiously sing the praises of Putin on your page, Niqnaq, but the track record so far is that he has proven to be one step ahead of, as Crazy Ivan terms it, “US capitalist tricks.” Which probably says more about the pathetic quality of U.S. schemes. Speaking of which, how long do you give the Kerry plan in Afghanistan to unravel? Two months?
What can I say? “We shall see.”