It seems that the slaughter in Syria will continue, and will increasingly broaden with the complete lack of opportunity for a political solution, the main condition of which is considered to be a binding cessation of the killing. And any time a date connected to the Syrian crisis draws near, the regime increases the size of the force used against the opposition and against civilians. This is not just in keeping with the security solution adopted since the beginning of the crisis, but also in order to show that it is still strong and that one can wager on its survival. If the behavior of the regime in itself carries the reasons for its inability to regain the initiative in politics and on the field, and to return to governing the country as it did before the eruption of the protest movement, the difficulties faced by the international community to reach consensus over a binding solution are connected to Russia's obsession with maintaining a guaranteed foothold for itself in Syria, as an expression of recognition of Russia's interests in the region. Indeed, Russian President Vladimir Putin wishes to ensure the safety of the Syrian leadership under any possible solution. This coincides with objections raised by his Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov against the sanctions imposed on both Iran and Syria, due to the harm they cause the interests of Russian corporations outside the two countries. In other words, Russia, in the course of protecting its interests, sees only the results, without examining the causes, knowing that it is a partner in negotiations over the Iranian nuclear issue, and has several times criticized Tehran's behavior in managing this issue. Indeed, in order to lift the sanctions imposed on Iran, it must first obtain the necessary guarantees from it concerning its military nuclear program, which the sanctions were imposed to prevent. And in order to lift the sanctions imposed on Syria, it must convince the regime to abandon the security solution and its excessive use of force, which is the very behavior that has driven the West to impose sanctions on it that would affect its military capability to cause death and destruction. Indeed, Russia's problem lies, in this sense, with the allies it is defending, even if it voices reservations from time to time over their behavior. And while Moscow returns to putting forward the “Geneva statement" as a minimum that can be agreed upon at the Security Council, the confusion persists between its strategic, political and commercial interests on the one hand, and the “safety" of the Syrian leadership on the other. Indeed, ever since the “Geneva statement" was issued more than two months ago, which incidentally represented the end of Kofi Annan's mission and of his six-point plan, the scope of the killing in Syria has increased in a terrifying manner. The regime has intentionally made use of its entire traditional arsenal to attack cities, their neighborhoods and their countryside, in such a way as to make this period the one rifest with blood, displacement and destruction in confronting the opposition. This is with the knowledge that the regime constantly declares that it agrees to the clauses of this statement, in a political tactic entirely at odds with its conduct on the field. If the statement, when it was issued, did not speak of the regime leaving, the behavior of its leaders since that time and what its forces have been doing, as documented by international and humanitarian organizations, force one at the very least to wonder about the extent to which it would be acceptable for this regime to be maintained – if not drive one towards the idea of prosecuting the perpetrators of documented crimes against humanity. The “Geneva statement", as Moscow wants it, would thereby turn into a magical solution for burying elements of the Syrian predicament and for concealing its reasons and the traces of its disastrous results. And solutions such as this, which seek to bring into accord strategic interests and the “safety" of the regime, will not be able to advance even a single step towards ending the tragedy, even if they are issued by the Security Council, if they do not include the two element of being binding and holding parties to account.
