One of Russia's main warnings when discussing the UN Security Council resolution # 2401 was that a truce can not be established declaratively. It is necessary to work directly "on the ground". The conflicting parties themselves must negotiate. It can not be that the resolution was adopted - and immediately all stopped shooting. If it were so, there would not be so much blood in the world.
Initially, for this resolution, the Western countries and their Arab allies in the region "drowned" most of all. If you recall, the authors of the draft document were Sweden and Kuwait. Their goal was not a truce. The West wanted to adopt such a resolution, which would serve as an ultimatum to the Syrian authorities. Say, you will not comply - punitive measures can be taken. This was said, in particular, by the US permanent representative to the UN, Nikki Haley:
A military solution is not ruled out in any situation. We do not want to be in the center of the Syrian conflict, but we want to do everything possible to protect people from chemical weapons
The Russian ambassador to the United Nations, Vasily Nebenz, repeatedly had to put Hayley in his place and explain that Moscow would not allow the UN Security Council to interpret the decision arbitrarily.
24 February resolution was adopted with Russian amendments, after which the document became much more realistic than at the beginning. In this regard, Haley was unhappy and tried to present Russia as the main enemy of the ceasefire. She burst out with a rather hysterical speech: they say that while Russia is fighting for every paragraph of the resolution, women and children continue to die in Eastern Gut.
What is left for Russian diplomats to do, how not to fight for every word and even every letter, if Washington repeatedly used ambiguous interpretations in its favor? And again we need to recall the example of Libya. UN Resolution 1973 referred to a ceasefire and the establishment of a no-fly zone. Just a few words that the ban on flights does not apply "also to other flights that are deemed necessary for the benefit of the Libyan people" - gave rise to turning the no-fly zone into a zone of total bombing of the country. How then can Russia play with those who cheated repeatedly? Only carefully watching the hands.
Okay, it would seem, diplomatic battles are over. The resolution was adopted - and it must be implemented in practice. And here begins a difficult, long road - not even to peace, but at least to a truce. And this road can not do without sticks in the wheel of "our partners".
One of the real steps to the ceasefire is the humanitarian breaks proposed by Russia, as well as humanitarian corridors, so that civilians can safely exit the combat area in East Gut. How did the US react? State Department spokesman Heather Naouert said:
I find it amusing that Russia calls for humanitarian corridors and humanitarian zones. The humanitarian zone should be the entire territory of Syria.
But in practice it was not at all fun. The first day of humanitarian breaks - 27 February - ended with the fact that the "opposition" fighters broke agreements and shelled humanitarian corridors. The second day led to the same. Third day ... Then you can not continue.
There are, however, positive results. For example, on 2 March two children, a boy and a girl, managed to escape through the humanitarian corridor. The militants killed their parents and the guys shot themselves in the back.
Is the lady from State Department Heather Nauret funny? He says that the truce should extend to the entire territory of Syria? Oh well. Russia proposed other concrete steps in this direction. Concerning, in particular, the area of At-Tanf. This Syrian territory, under the cover of the fight against IGIL, the United States was taken to a training camp where militants of the "moderate opposition" are trained. Washington does not agree to any humanitarian corridors in the area.
Another proposal of Russia concerns the peaceful inhabitants of Rakki. This city, after its solemnly "liberated" from IGIL (banned in Russia) pro-American forces, is a "black hole". There are neither representatives of humanitarian organizations, nor journalists allowed. According to the information leaking out from there, there are many corpses in Rakka, a serious epidemiological and humanitarian situation. Moscow proposed the creation of a special commission under the auspices of the United Nations to assess the situation in Raccoon. The US objected: there is no need "in Russia's parallel efforts".
Thus, it is Washington that prevents the world from stepping on the entire territory of the UAR. The United States wants only one thing: that the anti-terrorist operation of the Syrian army in the region of Eastern Guta cease. They wanted to stop it with the help of the resolution.
But in the final version - the ceasefire does not apply to "Djebhat An-Nusra" (banned in the Russian Federation) and other radical groups. So the operation continues, and by now the army controls already 35% of the territory of Eastern Guta. A new danger lies in the possibility of provocations by Washington and its allies. Not without reason again and again emerges the theme of chemical weapons.
And how the West "fights" with IGIL, you can judge by the following episode. Britain appealed to Washington with a request to guarantee that its two citizens who have joined the Islamists are not executed. And they will not even send Guantanamo to prison (it is for citizens of "wrong" countries). It's about those who cut their heads, including American journalists. In case the US refuses to spare the British, London threatens to stop supplying information about the movements and activities of the IGIL militants. Earlier, the Minister of Justice of France stood up for the citizens of her country, who joined the radical Islamists, so that they would not be executed in the United States.
This "scandal in a noble family" is perfectly illustrated by the fact that the principles of humanism are directed not at those, but the whole "fight against IGIL" turns into a farce. For some reason, humanism extends not to children, in the backs of which terrorists shoot, but to terrorists themselves - it does not matter which groups.