Via Saker: but From the Duran
I checked the definition of enshrine: to preserve or cherish as sacred
It was widely reported, that the Russian/Turkish ceasefire was not enshrined at the UN Security Council, because it was not endorsed by all parties and had to dropped to get the resolution passed.
December 31, 2016:
Initial reports noted this resolution passed unanimously by the Security Council.. but the information, widely disseminated shortly after the initial news broke made clear the resolution was passed only after changes were made
Therefore what ever may have been enshrined at the UN, via the resolution, did not include an endorsement of the ceasefire agreement. Because that was dropped so this resolution could be passed.
I left two comments at Saker's regarding the piece by Mr Mercouris-
My last sentence should have read - Therefore the ceasefire was neither endorsednorwas it enshrined
I get so disappointed, so often.💔
Mr Mercouris should have pondered the possibility that those who would not endorse the ceasefire agreement may work the hardest to ensure the ceasefire fails.
Including, but, not limited to a second coup attempt against Turkey.
Yes, I said it. The shooting at the nightclub has brought that to mind yet again.
"As my colleague Adam Garrie has previously reported, on 31st December 2016 the United Nations Security Council unanimously supported Resolution 2336, a Russian drafted Resolution enshrining the Russian-Turkish ceasefire plan for Syria"
I checked the definition of enshrine: to preserve or cherish as sacred
It was widely reported, that the Russian/Turkish ceasefire was not enshrined at the UN Security Council, because it was not endorsed by all parties and had to dropped to get the resolution passed.
December 31, 2016:
Initial reports noted this resolution passed unanimously by the Security Council.. but the information, widely disseminated shortly after the initial news broke made clear the resolution was passed only after changes were made
Western members of the council had sought changes to the draft resolution circulated by Russia and Turkey during consultations Saturday morning to clarifythe role of the U.N. and the meaning of the agreement brokered by Moscow and Ankara
The final text dropped an endorsement of the Syria cease-fire agreement brokered by Moscow and Ankara, and it changed the draft to call the Astana meeting "an important step ahead of the resumption of negotiations under the auspices of the United Nations in Geneva on Feb. 8, 2017."
Therefore what ever may have been enshrined at the UN, via the resolution, did not include an endorsement of the ceasefire agreement. Because that was dropped so this resolution could be passed.
I left two comments at Saker's regarding the piece by Mr Mercouris-
Turkey has one big reason to adhere to this plan-
-I’ve named it repeatedly here-
-I’ve spoken of it for years at my blog
Greater Kurdistan aka Israel 2.0 which needs a great big chunk of Turkey in order to spring into existence.
Remaking the middle east and North Africa- when are people going to call it what it is rather then obfuscate it in word play?
Mercurious mentions this then pooh/poohs’ it while playing the cult of personality card-
“For the Turks a key provision of the ceasefire plan is that any future agreement about the future of Syria to be reached at Astana must be based – in the words of the ceasefire plan – upon “full respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Syrian Arab Republic”. In other words any possibility of an independent Kurdish state being carved out of Syrian territory is ruled out”
Since it is upon Erdogan that the future of this ceasefire agreement ultimately depends, it would be unwise to invest too many hopes in it”
An independent Kurdish state in Syria will spell the end of Syria as well as the end of Turkey as it has done Iraq in- It will guarantee increasing Israeli meddling in yet another part of Syria
Mercouris needs to do his homework :
“As my colleague Adam Garrie has previously reported, on 31st December 2016 the United Nations Security Council unanimously supported Resolution 2336, a Russian drafted Resolution enshrining the Russian-Turkish ceasefire plan for Syria”
This is actually incorrect- The Security Council voted on and supported a Modified Resolution that did Not endorse the ceasefire
http://pennyforyourthoughts2.blogspot.ca/2016/12/un-security-council-approves-russian.html
“The final text dropped an endorsement of the Syria cease-fire agreement brokered by Moscow and Ankara, and it changed the draft to call the Astana meeting “an important step ahead of the resumption of negotiations under the auspices of the United Nations in Geneva on Feb. 8, 2017.”
from my blog post you head to NBC:
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/syrias-suffering-families/u-n-security-council-approves-syrian-cease-fire-plan-russia-n701866
” Western members of the council had sought changes to the draft resolution circulated by Russia and Turkey during consultations Saturday morning to clarify the role of the U.N. and the meaning of the agreement brokered by Moscow and Ankara.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/dec/31/russia-syria-ceasefire-un-security-council-damascus-kazakhstan
This is a very important fact and Mercouris missed it entirely- relying on the work of his colleague Adam Garrie.
http://news.nationalpost.com/news/world/un-unanimously-supports-russian-turkish-efforts-to-end-conflict-in-syria-as-ceasefire-wavers
“The resolution’s final text dropped an endorsement of the Syria cease-fire agreement reached Thursday, simply taking note of it….”
Therefore the ceasefire was neither endorsed now was it enshrined
My last sentence should have read - Therefore the ceasefire was neither endorsednorwas it enshrined
I get so disappointed, so often.💔
Mr Mercouris should have pondered the possibility that those who would not endorse the ceasefire agreement may work the hardest to ensure the ceasefire fails.
Including, but, not limited to a second coup attempt against Turkey.
Yes, I said it. The shooting at the nightclub has brought that to mind yet again.