For some reason the article is not being carried on Western mainstream media, although the news it brings is one which should bring tears of joy replacing the tears of sorrow which have marked the Syrian faces during its devastating five year foul war.
As a new round of Syria peace talks kicks off in Geneva, Syrians in government-controlled areas head to polling stations to elect a new parliament. Washington has dismissed the poll out of hand saying it doesn’t reflect “the will of the people.” The question is of course: why doesn’t it? As RT correctly retrieves from the vaults of recent human history, this is not the first time a war-ridden land organises polls to gauge the public’s opinion. In fact, the US has done it themselves in that ill-advised Iraq war. But, back then, these polls were seen as “legitimate” by the same government dismissing the Syrian result already.
Why is that? Could we deduct the United States are afraid the result is not to their benefit? Could it be that the US is worried that Mr. Assad would get more votes than they’d like?
Elections only seem to be appreciated by the American powers-that-be when the outcome is to their advantage. In 2006, in elections which were largely seen as democratic, correct and notably “unrigged” by international observers, Hamas won, but the US sought to overthrow it.
The same happened in Crimea.
But that’s not even relevant. The media’s silence around this vote itself is. If there’s any sign better to indicate stabilisation of a country so long in instability, but to be able to organise the vote in almost 80% of its territory, then tell us. Being able to organise it, have people cast and count results – whatever the outcome – is newsworthy.
Why does Western media hardly report on it? Why isn’t his front-page news?