World powers agree Syria ceasefire

World powers meeting on Syria have agreed to implement a nationwide "cessation of hostilities", US Secretary of State John Kerry has said.

But he said the ceasefire would not apply to the fight with jihadist groups Islamic State (IS) and al-Nusra Front.

He also said the powers had agreed to accelerate and expand the delivery of humanitarian aid.

The announcement comes as the Syrian army, backed by Russian air strikes, advances in Aleppo province.

A UN task force will be set up to ensure humanitarian access is granted to all sides, Mr Kerry said.

Mr Kerry admitted the ceasefire plan was "ambitious" and said the real test would be whether the parties on the ground honoured the commitments.

He made the announcement alongside his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov and the UN special envoy for Syria, Staffan de Mistura.

Mr Lavrov said there were "reasons to hope we have done a great job today".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-35556783

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/syria-civil-war-world-powers-agree-cessation-of-hostilities-and-expansion-of-humanitarian-aid-a6868786.html

What are people's thoughts on this? Will it amount to much or will it be of little use?

Reply 1

TheArtofProtest

They've agreed to work together to find a cessation of hostilities and they've imposed an arbitrary timeline of a week. There is no way they will get that done.

They may negotiate to drop aid into Aleppo but it is inevitable that the fight will continue for many months. Assad will not stop now that he's got Aleppo within his sight and Russia, as Assad's backer, won't like to step off the gas now.

Any cessation of hostilities agreement by the world powers (I'm assuming it's the Security Council here) has to be enforceable. If that means shooting down Putin's planes, then that action must be taken.

Reply 2

whorace

Wait a minute? How does one enforce this without admission that they are responsible for ground troops? Why would jihadists stop because John Kerry signed an agreement?

Reply 3

AlifunArnab

Original post by whorace

Wait a minute? How does one enforce this without admission that they are responsible for ground troops? Why would jihadists stop because John Kerry signed an agreement?

They won't, and neither will Russia. Then they'll say the entirety of the rebels don't want peace and will continue fighting them, making Russia look like the heroes.

Honestly, a ceasefire will simply benefit Bashar and would not help the rebels at all.

Reply 4

a noble chance

'But he said the ceasefire would not apply to the fight with jihadist groups Islamic State (IS) and al-Nusra Front.'

Russia's involvement in the first place was predicated on this fight. Obviously they will continue to use it to bolster Assad against the rebels.

Reply 5

MildredMalone

tbh we should just leave them to it. Those people will never be able to live in a non-violent democracy, so the rest of the world should just withdraw its neck, and let them kill each other until they grow out of it.

Reply 6

AlifunArnab

Original post by TheArtofProtest

Essentially, it's a way for Russia / Bashar / Iran to continue to attack the opposition claiming they're Nusra.

In fact, Russia have been attacking the opposition whilst claiming they've been fighting ISIS.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 7

BaconandSauce

Original post by MildredMalone

Have to agree

Build a big wall around the whole area and let them fight it out amongst themselves then deal with the winner

Reply 8

Observatory

"World powers have agreed to seek a nationwide "cessation of hostilities" in Syria to begin in a week's time, after talks in Munich, Germany.

...

"The Syrian government has not yet responded, though a key rebel coalition welcomed the announcement.

...

"British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond said the cessation would only work if Russia halted its raids, although Mr Lavrov said they would continue."

So in fact the only people who have agreed to this ceasefire are the people who are not involved, except to attack factions they have excluded from the ceasefire. Clearly the rebels are now losing, and rather hope that their conquerors will just stop conquering them in exchange for no concessions, but I am not holding my breath. I predict 100% success for this people-who-aren't-doing-anything-keep-doing-nothing plan.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 9

Evilluminati

France was praising Russia not long ago. What changed their mind?

Assad's forces taking back control of Syria. They are the one's who armed and trained rebels that created the conflict in the first place.

If you wanted stability, you don't arm and train jihadists to take out a government you dislike...

Our governments who aided this should be on trial. That goes for Obama's administration, Cameron, Hollande, Merkel.

Reply 10

RF_PineMarten

I won't believe it until I see it happen, considering there have been failed ceasefire attempts before.

Right now, much of the opposition is made up of Islamists, and the likes of Nusra and Ahrar al Sham will never abide by a ceasefire or peace deal. So even if this works (and it probably won't), what would happen is that some groups would stick to it and others wouldn't - so it would be merely a reduction in violence, rather than a full ceasefire.

The Syrian government is also on the advance at the moment, which makes it difficult - they have less motive to negotiate and implement ceasefires when they're starting to win militarily.