Peace Agreement With Syria Will Give Humanitarian Aid A Chance, At The Very Least

What many were skeptical of ever happening in relation to the Syrian civil war finally did happen on Saturday when U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry reportedly reached a agreement with Russia’s counterpart Sergey Lavrov.

However, hours after the agreement, according to a report on ABC News, there was an escalation of airstrikes on Aleppo which killed 45 people, likely in order for the Syrian government to dominate as quickly as possible before the cessation of hostilities goes into action on Monday.

In recent months, the conflict in the Middle East took a sharp turn when Syrian government forces began attacking the Kurdish city of Hasakah, which was said to have American special forces present there to train the Kurdish fighters against ISIS.

This was the first time U.S. fighter jets would be sent scrambling to the area in order to protect those Kurdish forces, which AFP via ABC News Australia details.

At the same time, Russian forces also continued their attacks on terrorist groups outside of Aleppo as reported by al-Arabya, along with reports of civilian casualties from airstrikes conducted by both Russian and Syrian military.

Soon after these reports, Turkish military responded to Kurdish forces on their border with Syria by attacking them and ISIS, after an alleged coup attempt against President Erdogan.

As the Inquisitr says through an op-ed about the attacks, it might have been more than a coincidence that the Turks attacked U.S. allies as they had accused the U.S. of instigating the coup attempt. And it doesn’t help that the U.S. will not hand over the man who they believe was the mastermind behind it, Fethullah Gulen.

Before the U.S and Russia made the alleged peace agreement in Geneva, the relationship between both countries was that of adversaries and for the most part, it still is; with Russia appearing to dominate diplomatic deals that many opposed to the Obama administration feel is taking place in America’s stomping grounds being the Middle East.

News around this agreement is certainly positive but is appropriately criticized for being too ambitious.

David Sanger of The New York Times talked about this new agreement on the PBS NewsHour Saturday evening, based on his article with the paper.

Sanger explains the possible problems with the agreement where he says that without the involvement of some of the other powers in the region — such as Saudi Arabia and Iran — there could be influencing Assad.

“The central problem with it Alison is that there are so many other players here. The Iranians, different opposition groups, the Saudis; that, if they’re not all buying into this agreement to which they were not a party to negotiating, this whole thing could fracture apart.”

An article by the Inquisitr that refers to the agreement as a ray of hope explains the agreement even further. But it includes the Cessation of Hostilities that have been tried in the area repeatedly but have not held as Sanger would suggest, because of lack of regulatory action against the Assad regime.

Aid groups suspend ties with UN in Syria over Assad influence https://t.co/SIhBU02Fmv

— Al Jazeera Breaking News (@AJENews) September 8, 2016

According to the ABC News article referred to above, Syria’s State-run SANA News Agency announced that the Syria government would accept the deal to stop hostilities in Aleppo for humanitarian reasons, but there was no acknowledgment as to when this would take place.

Nonetheless, it would appear that much of the effort to complete the agreement lies on Russia, which many agree is a terrible idea, to letting Russia call the shots in this case, and whether that includes reaching a consensus on the goal of ousting Syrian president Assad.

For the time being, the consensus to this agreement as a start would be in order to allow humanitarian aid into those areas that are in need of it the most.

[Photo by Kevin Lamarque/AP Images]