News / Interviews

US pursuing regime change in Syria talks: Analyst

Saturday, 06 February 2016 9:51 AM [ Last Update: Saturday, 06 February 2016 9:50 AM ]

US Secretary of State John Kerry (C) attends a donor conference entitled ‘Supporting Syria & The Region’ at the QEII centre in central London on February 4, 2016. ©AFP

Press TV has interviewed Sara Flounders, with the International Action Center from New York, on the US blaming of Russia over the halt in the Geneva peace talks on Syria.

The following is a rough transcription of the interview.

Press TV: How do you feel about that statement? Russia is working against those peace talks?

Flounders: The peace talks from the US and NATO position have really always been about imposing regime change and calling for the collapse of the Syrian government. And it’s very clear that Russian assistance has been a real force against the whole array of mercenary and terrorist forces aligned against the Syrian government and particularly the forces of ISIS.

Now the US, Turkey, Saudi Arabia have in every way given support, defense and arming of both the ISIS or Daesh forces and the whole array of forces who are determined to destroy Syrian sovereignty. So, there are two different positions going into the peace talks.

And I think from the very beginning of course the US agenda was the talks to fail unless they could impose a complete destruction of Syria. They’re frustrated. They haven’t been able to do that and of course they are very angry that Russian assistance seems to be having a real impact in turning the tide.

Press TV: The goal here for all of the above is to defeat terrorist groups even the US-led coalition claims that is what it is doing in Syria and Iraq. So, why can’t all of the above work together?

Flounders: Because the US is really not interested in defeating terrorist groups. It had such a role in helping to create and continue the role of these terrorist groups. And they rename them opposition groups regularly, but they really provide safe haven for these groups.

So the myth for US intervention and bombing was that they were attacking Daesh or ISIS forces, and that’s not true at all. So, there are so many myths going in to these peace talks as to what could be imposed on them and that really is the problem. There are two different agendas on the ground and therefore, there are two different agendas at the peace talks.

And despite all of a talk of peace that is not what US policy has been interested in from the very beginning, and this is a really crucial struggle. If the sovereignty of Syria were to be destroyed, it’s a risk, it’s a threat to every country in the region, because this policy will immediately be continued and it’s something that all the surrounding countries know very very well.

So there’s a lot at stake in the talks, there’s a lot at stake in the fighting.

Press TV’s website can also be accessed at the following alternate addresses:

www.presstv.co.uk