Five attempts and several weeks of heated debate took members of the UN Security Council to finally make Saturday a resolution on the mechanism for the provision of humanitarian aid to Syria. Moscow is not satisfied with the mechanism that operates in the bypass of Damascus. But despite the fact that a compromise variant is closest to what is proposed by Russia, in the vote, she abstained, as they were not able to achieve a condemnation of sanctions against the Syrian authorities. The issue is postponed for a year. By the time the situation in Syria may again radically change.Several weeks of heated debate, four failed attempts to adopt a resolution — for a long time no one vote in the UN security Council did not pass so rapidly. Last week Russia and China have twice vetoed draft resolution proposed by Germany and Belgium. In turn, the Russian version twice failed to gain a majority in the security Council. In the end, the mechanism of cross-border humanitarian aid officially ceased to exist on Friday evening.Such an outcome anyone was not satisfied, despite the different views on the operation of the mechanism to keep it in one form or another was the interest of all members of the security Council. A compromise was found a day later. 12 countries voted for the resolution, which a year to renew the crossings at Bab al-Hawa, which is 85% of all humanitarian supplies in Idlib. Russia, China and the Dominican Republic abstained.According to him, from the very beginning he “was marred by sluggishness, hypocrisy, disrespect and even disregard the rules of the Security Council.” Moscow immediately offered to leave open only one of the most important checkpoint — though only for six months, not a year. “We could come to this result before,” said Mr. Polansky. The main reason why Russia and China abstained— no the resolution a paragraph on the condemnation of Western sanctions against Damascus.The mechanism of cross-border humanitarian aid work in Syria in 2014. It was installed as a temporary measure, when most of the country not controlled by the Central government. Initially, the aid came to Syria through four crossing (two on the border with Turkey, one from Jordan and one from Iraq). However, in January of this year, with the next extension mechanism Moscow and Damascus stated that the situation on the ground has changed dramatically, the Syrian government has regained control over most of the country. After a long debate in the UN it was decided to leave for six months only two checkpoints on the Turkish border at Bab al-Hawa and Bab-es-Salam. The West this decision is not satisfied, and for several months at each meeting of the UN security Council on the humanitarian situation in Syria, Russia was accused of that with this mechanisme to the North-East of the country, the assistance does not reach. In response, Russia’s permanent representative to the UN, Vasily Nebenzia methodically reminded that the transition to Iraqi border al-Arabiya were not used for humanitarian supplies since October of 2019, and the transition from Jordan al-Ramtha — in the summer of 2018, long before their work was officially stopped. In July again the question arose about the extension mechanism. Russia offered to write one checkpoint. The West insisted on a one-year extension of the work of the two checkpoints on the Turkish border with the possibility of opening a third CAT El Arabia — on the territory controlled by Kurdish groups, in the area of responsibility of the United States.In particular, in April, the Damascus approved the delivery of humanitarian assistance through the territory under its control in two settlements in the area of de-escalation Idlib — dareta-izza and Atareb. However, the UN refused in the organization of the convoy under the pretext of the danger of entering the fashion industry, from government-controlled areas in Idlib. “In Syria was only 255 cases. Maybe according to this logic, we had to stop humanitarian supplies to Idlib from the territories affected by the coronavirus, where do they come from?” — outraged Vassily Nebenzia at one of the meetings of the security Council, hinting that in Turkey, where the UN was ready to send convoys, the incidence of coronavirus was significantly higher than in Syria.Moscow’s position lies in the gradual curtailment of humanitarian assistance mechanism and comes down to three arguments. The first is the situation on the ground has changed almost everywhere, except in Idlib. Therefore, the mechanism of cross-border assistance should be gradually replaced with humanitarian supplies in accordance with the principles outlined in the UN General Assembly resolution 46/182, adopted in 1991. In the document there is a speech about the respect of sovereignty, territorial integrity and national unity of any country. That is, humanitarian assistance should be delivered only with the consent of the official authorities and at their request. “Cross-border mechanism is used as leverage against humanitarian supplies across the frontline inside Syria, as well as the pretext and excuse that you should not seriously deal with humanitarian supplies from inside Syria. This, in our opinion, it borders on sabotage,”— said earlier Vasily Nebenzia.The second point is the lack of control of the transboundary movement. For its part, Damascus has also said that the humanitarian convoys from Turkey to Idlib weapons.During the recent debates, Dmitry Polyanskiy said that the UN in Idlib are not present. “Therefore, it is impossible to track and monitor how humanitarian aid is delivered and who as a result of its final recipients. It is no secret that terrorist groups, write about this established by the Security Council, in control of some part of the zone of de-escalation and use of humanitarian assistance of the United Nations as a tool to exert pressure on the civilian population, openly benefit from these supplies,” he said.The third point — the unfair distribution of assistance. While Western countries were fighting for the delivery of humanitarian aid to the population outside the control of the Damascus area (in Idlib and in the North-East of Syria), other Syrians have remained in distress. Particularly acute was the situation in the areas that the Syrian authorities only returned under its control, but has not yet managed to restore the infrastructure. The situation is exacerbated by the sanctions of the EU and the United States against Damascus. Not casually in the Russian version of the resolution, supported by Beijing, was discussed not only on the number of PPC, but also condemning the sanctions. “We were not asked to reduce the border crossings. From the beginning, we just asked them to remove unilateral sanctions. From the very beginning we requested that the UN Secretary General presented a report analysing the impact of unilateral sanctions,” said political coordinator permanent mission of China to the UN Yao Shaojun.At the same time Western countries since the adoption of the compromise resolution accused Russia and China of hindering the delivery of humanitarian aid to Syrians. “This resolution is not, however, have repeatedly called for the Security Council, UN Secretary-General, antónio Guterres, and dozens of NGOs working in Syria,”— said the U.S. permanent representative to the UN, Kelly Kraft. “We are disappointed that the Security Council had no choice,” added the British representative Jonathan Allen. According to the Ambassador of Germany Christoph Heusgen, 500 thousand children in Aleppo who had been receiving assistance through the gate Bab-es-Salam, “Wake up tomorrow morning and realize that we failed them, they will have to fight for food, for medicine.” He also noted that it would be good assistance from Damascus have reached this area, but she never comes. However, the UN didn’t even try to discuss with the Syrian government to deliver assistance in this and other areas of the province of Aleppo, returned under the control of Damascus. During one of the debates Vassily Nebenzia already asked the leadership of the UN related question, but got no answer.”The UN security Council spends too much time and energy on the debate over humanitarian aid to Syria. I understand the fears of the West that Damascus could abuse the distribution of humanitarian assistance. Just as Russia fears an unjust solution to this issue through cross-border mechanism. But maybe you should think about cooperation with Damascus in the matter of distribution of humanitarian aid, creating a monitoring mechanism in this regard”,— said “Kommersant” the Vice-President of the Russian Council on international Affairs AlexPDR Aksenenok.Marianna Belenkaya