I'll help Syria
if the U.S.
attacks, says Putin in chilling threat to Obama as G20 summit breaks up in
acrimony
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2414139/Syria-Russia-vows-help-Syria-America-carries-military-strikes-Assad-s-regime.html
Russia
last night issued a chilling threat to assist Syria
if the US
leads military strikes against its hated regime.
As a summit of world leaders broke up in acrimony, Vladimir
Putin declared openly that he is already supplying arms to Syrian tyrant Bashar
Assad and vowed to step up support if a planned missile attack goes ahead.
There were gasps as the Russian President made his remarks
after being asked how he would react if Barack Obama proceeds with an attack in
response to Syria’s used of chemical weapons.
‘Will we help Syria? We will. And we are already
helping, we send arms, we cooperate in the economics sphere,’ Mr Putin
declared.
Amid signs any US-led action could be delayed for as long as
a fortnight, with President Barack Obama battling to win the approval of
Congress, Russia last night sent a fourth warship with ‘unspecified cargo’ to
the eastern Mediterranean.
While few observers expect Mr Putin to deploy his forces in
the event of a US-led missile strike on Damascus,
Mr Putin’s remarks suggest he is determined to prop up Assad’s rule.
He has already suggested he could renew a suspended contract
to supply Syria
with a sophisticated missile shield.
Despite what the US, the UK and EU countries again said was
conclusive evidence Assad was behind a sarin attack that killed almost 1,500
civilians, including 500 children, last month, the Russian leader insisted
rebel forces trying to overthrow the Syrian leader had staged the incident.
He said it was a ‘provocation by militants expecting aid’
and insisted that military action without the approval of the United Nations
Security Council would ‘violate international law’.
He insisted most people in the US, UK and other countries
calling for military intervention did not support it - and also pointed out the
Pope had made clear the ‘inadmissability’ of such a move.
Last night, Russia
issued a 27-page document on the conclusions of the G20 that made no mention of
Syria, though the crisis had
dominated discussions at St Petersburg.
In an unprecedented act of defiance for any recent
international summit, eleven countries, including the US and the UK, issued their own statement
demanding a ‘strong international response to the grave violation of the
world’s rules and conscience’ by Assad’s regime.
The countries, which also included Australia, Canada,
France, Italy, Japan,
South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Spain
and Turkey, said they would
‘support efforts undertaken by the United States and other countries
to reinforce the prohibition on the use of chemical weapons’.
Mr Cameron, whose failure to win the support of Parliament
for British participation on military action was ridiculed by Mr Putin,
attacked the ‘dangerous doctrine’ that military action is only legal with
United Nations backing.
He said Britain
and other Western nations could not ‘contract out our foreign policy, our
morality, to the potential of a Russian veto’.
Insisting Mr Obama is no ‘warmonger’, the Prime Minister
said world leaders would set an appalling precedent if they failed to respond
to the use of chemical weapons.
‘Everyone will pay a price,’ he said.
After more than hours of fruitless talks that went on into
the early hours of the morning, Mr Cameron insisted Russia’s claim the Syrian
rebels - not Assad’s hated regime -- were responsible for a gas attack killing
nearly 1,500 people was ‘miles from the truth’.
The Prime Minister attacked the argument made by countries
opposing US-led missile strikes on Damascus
that any intervention made without the approval of the UN Security Council
would be illegal, even on humanitarian grounds.
‘The argument that did flare up at the dinner last night is
a disagreement about whether it’s possible to have legal military engagement
outside the UN Security Council,’ he said.
‘Our strong legal advice is that there is a case for
humanitarian intervention. There was a strong argument from some that unless
there is a Security Council resolution there is no legal basis for action.
‘I think it’s a very dangerous doctrine. If you accept that,
you could have a country massacring half its people, a blockage at the UN
Security Council, and no-one could act.
‘It was brought home to me last night that quite aside from
the Syrian problem we need to make that argument very vigorously with countries
like South Africa, Brazil, India and others.
‘One of the frustrations of last night is you have countries
- including Security Council permanent members - saying all this must be
decided by the UN Security Council, and yet they are the very countries that
are blocking any action and have been blocking resolutions for the last two and
a half years.’
Mr Cameron said it had been clear that the G20 was ‘never
going to reach conclusions about Syria’, adding: ‘The divisions are
too great.’
Attacking Russian intransigence, he said: ‘The Russian
position that, as Putin has said, if it is proved it is Assad he will take a
different view but he is fairly clear that it is the opposition, is miles away
from what I think the truth is and miles away from what lots of us believe.
‘He says to me that he would like to see further evidence of
regime culpability and we will go on providing evidence of regime culpability,
as will the Americans and others, but I think it will take a lot to change his
mind.’
Mr Cameron, whose plan to join US-led military action was
scuppered last week when MPs voted against, yesterday offered another £52
million in aid to help the millions who have fled the Assad regime.
He asked President Putin to put pressure on the Syrian
regime to agree safe corridors along which aid convoys could pass without
coming under attack from either side in its civil war.
Mr Cameron suggested the UN Security Council could be asked
to endorse such a plan.
‘I have never heard the Russians argue against humanitarian
access. It may well be necessary at some stage to go back to the UN and that
will test whether the Russians will support it,’ he said.
‘There’s a case at some stage for writing down all the
things that need to happen in terms of access and getting UN support for it. It
might be necessary to get a UN resolution.’
Amid growing signs in the US that Mr Obama could struggle to
get approval from Congress for his plans, Mr Cameron said he was making a
‘powerful argument... as someone who is trying to extract himself from Middle
East entanglements and he is no way seen as a warmonger’.
Last night the US
ordered its diplomats to leave neighbouring Lebanon
as Congress debates Syria
military strikes.
President Obama insisted military action was right even if
the public was largely against it, saying US intervention in the Second World
War had also been opposed by a majority.
As he left the summit, the US
leader said: ‘I’m not drawing an analogy to World War II other than to say that
when London was
getting bombed, it was profoundly unpopular, both in Congress and around the
country to help the British. Doesn’t mean it wasn’t the right thing to do.’