Putin criticizes Western position on Syria during G8

Russian President Vladimir Putin and British PM David Cameron have already discussed the burning topic during their Sunday talks in London. Putin renewed his criticism of the Western position in startling tones, describing Assad's foes as cannibals.

Will Russia and the West find a common ground on the hot issue of the Syrian conflict? To talk more on that we are joined live on the phone by Marcus Papadopoulos, Publisher and Editor of Politics First from London.

Will the forum participants find a common ground on Syrian issue?

I think it is very unlikely that that will happen at the G8 summit in Belfast. I think the first indication of that was the press-conference given yesterday by Minister David Cameron and President Vladimir Putin. It was a very frosty, very chilly press-conference. What we are basically seeing now is there is the division over Syria whereby the west has now recently announced that it will be arming Syrian militants led by the United States and of course Russia is completely opposed to that. Russia from the very start of the conflict in Syria over 2 years ago has been resolutely in favor of supporting state sovereignty and it is completely opposed to foreign intervention in Syria. So, it is very unlikely that there is going to be any sort of resolution, any sort of substance for a resolution regarding Syria at the summit.

Does it look like the G8 or the G7 Plus Summit right now over the Syrian issue minding the Russia takes a different position?

If we just focus in regards of Prime Minister David Cameron, he has been toiling with the idea of arming the militants in Syria but that could be derailed now because what we’ve seen in the last few days is a lot of very senior British politicians and other officials who have now come out openly, they’ve come out publicly and they warned against Britain supplying the militants with arms in today’s Daily Telegraph, national newspaper in Britain. The mayor of London Boris Johnson has completely come out against it and he has warned that Britain should not be arming "maniacs”. He is referring to the Free Syrian Army. Yesterday we had Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg warn against it, today the former Chief of the British Army Lord Dannatt has come out against arming the FSA. And we also hear that up to 81 conservative MPs from David Cameron’s own party, the conservative party, are actually against it. So, it’s becoming a really difficult issue for David Cameron now on the back of the referendum on EU and gay marriage. It really is dividing his party.

How will the conflict develop further if Syrian rebels get weaponry from the US and the Assad-regime supporters get Russian S-300 missiles?

Regrettably I think that the west led by the United States are the ones who have blood on their hands. The conflict in Syria can only be resolved politically. We have to remember that over the last 2 years ordinary Syrian people are the ones who were bearing the blunts of this appalling war and if anyone in the west really thinks that pulling weapons into this conflict is going to help to resolve it or tilt the balance in the other way, they are seriously mistaken. So, it is ironic that Russia is accused of having blood on its hands by people in the west when it is actually the other way. But in regard to Barack Obama’s decision last week, or announcement last week to arm the militants, I think we need to look carefully at that. What we are hearing is that the decision has been taken to arm the militants from Syria but at the moment it is light weapons and of course we are hearing talk about a no-fly zone but I think that is very unrealistic – no-fly zone wouldn’t happen because Russia would veto it to the United Nations Security Council, and also the Syrian defense systems across the country - there are Russian military personnel attached to them. So, I don’t think no-fly zone seriously is going to happen but the decision is being taken to supply light arms to the militants in Syria but once again light arms – I think we need to step back and reassess this situation. I suspect that Barack Obama 2 years, even perhaps a year ago saw an opportunity in Syria to replace the Syrian government, to replace president Assad and with that to have installed a western friendly government. But I don’t think he ever really wanted to get too involved in Syria and I think that decision last week to arm the Syrian rebels I think he is attempting to appease an audience and that audience at the Capitol Hill led by Senator John McCain I don’t think we really are going to see heavy weaponry being sent to the militants and aircraft missiles, anti-tank missiles. I don’t think Barack Obama actually wants in-depth American involvements in this. I think that decision was to appease an audience and to try and justify to his audience by saying the Syrian government "have crossed a red line” and we are doing something about it. But I really don’t think we are going to see anything more.