British "leftist" neocon warmonger Peter Tatchell has been criticizing Stop the War Coalition for its refusal to join his deranged calls for more Western-led military intervention in Syria and confrontation with Russia.
Tatchell, who claims to be an anti-war activist, has consistently advocated war as the solution to the violence in Syria. He sees the Syrian government as the problem, and Western military and moral support for violence as the only answer to the Syrian government.
Apparently, the main goal of
Western interventionist commentators like Peter Tatchell has been to promote a Western-led war against the Assad government in Syria, under the guise of "stopping" this war the West itself started and funded against that country.
Although Peter Tatchell defends himself by saying he has criticized the current anti-ISIL bombing strategy of Western governments and has Syrian friends, this is irrelevant. His own advocacy is about imposing a foreign "no-fly zone" or "humanitarian corridor", exactly as advocated by the Turkish regime and US warmonger candidate Hillary Clinton.
Tatchell claims his strange "no bomb zone" for Syria would not involve any violence, despite it requiring the defeat of Russian aircraft and missile attacks on Russian airfields that will start a nuclear war.
Tatchell has even tried to hijack anti-war headlines and pictures in Britain to impose reactionary flags and slogans of pro-war neocons and Syrian rebel groups on anti-war and anti-imperialist rallies. This is despite the fact the anti-war movement in Britain is against intervention of any kind in Syria, and recognizes the war as a result of Western foreign intervention rather than the result of a failure to intervene.
Since the conflict started in 2011, Western governments offered a desperate lifeline of weapons and supplies to militant groups in Syria, convincing Tatchell and other neocons that the
violence was going their way. Threats were made, as in 2013, that the US would bomb the Syrian Army and help the rebel groups defeat them
after a chemical attack was blamed on them. Many of these groups only continued to fight because they believed Western warplanes would soon arrive to bomb their country and save their few surviving followers from the Syrian Army, just as Tatchell advocates.
Throughout the conflict in Syria, President Bashar al-Assad has stated that there would be peace within weeks if Western governments stopped giving weapons to his enemies and stopped encouraging them to fight on. This is reinforced by facts. The government, with no foreign support, managed to preserve much of its unity for multiple years and remains the sole provider of education and medical care. This was despite a vast coalition of up to 60 foreign states placing sanctions on it, supporting its enemies, bombing its territory illegally, or trying to annex areas.
Syria's survival is the achievement of Assad, whom the West and Peter Tatchell consider "illegitimate". Comparatively, anti-Assad rebels were only able to capture any territory through constant and intense support and training by foreign troops. Often, foreign troops even had to get directly involved in shelling Syrian forces and attacking Syrian aircraft to protect the unpopular fake "revolution" and make it look strong.
After
US support for armed factions in Syria was counterbalanced by Russian airstrikes beginning in September,
the war shifted decisively in Assad's favor again, with support for Syrian rebels evaporating and massive territories being liberated after years of starvation and mass executions by rebels.
As Assad's forces close in on Western-backed rebel groups, these groups along with so-called Human Rights Watch and other NGOs are no longer spreading propaganda about "Assad's barrel bombs" and now only talk about Russian airstrikes. The US regime has also only recently come to the negotiating table because of these terrible defeats.
