It’s difficult to write anything constructive about the situation in Syria.
What began as a popular uprising against Syria’s Assad regime has deteriorated into a bitter, civil conflict where numerous minor groupings are competing for space and power and the title to be the most barbarous.
Many are being funded and armed from outside as Syria becomes a battleground for the proxy wars of others. US President Barack Obama’s “redline” issue of the use of chemical weapons marks nothing but a continuation of the mindless brutality which grips the country.
Meanwhile the US is preparing to attack Syria with France and Israel his only significant allies. British PM David Cameron’s attempt to get majority support in the UK parliament failed spectacularly last week on the back of huge public opposition in the UK – despite his best efforts only 11% of Britons support the UK joining a US-led attack.
In 2003 the “coalition of the willing” to invade Iraq comprised the murderous half-wit George Bush, the deceitful liar Tony Blair and Australia’s revolting, “me-too” John Howard and a handful of other hangers on. Today even the US is struggling to get their people and politicians to endorse military action against Syria.
It’s more than a told-you-so moment when Obama finds himself on the side of Al Qaeda aligned groups – surely the ultimate ignominy for a country that went to war 12 years ago to defeat this network the US blamed for the toppling the twin towers. US hypocrisy is a stunning work of political art.
Prime Minister John Key’s response has been predictable. He says he will consider New Zealand supporting a US attack even without a UN mandate. Challenged that this would be illegal under international law Key says such a government decision would be justified morally because of the horrific use of chemical weapons. John Key’s selective morality is consistent with National’s slavish alignment with US foreign policy.
Labour’s Phil Goff is little better. Rather than condemn a possible US-led attack on Syria Goff hedges around the issues more afraid to offend the US than assert a moral or legal position.
The use of chemical weapons is as chilling and deadly as the use of drone strikes, depleted uranium and cluster bombs – the US weapons of choice – but this is lost on Labour’s US-oriented Foreign Affairs spokesperson.
It’s important for the UN and countries like New Zealand to condemn all outside intervention in Syria. It’s a position which is easy to assert but difficult to enforce while the US and others posture and plan unilaterally.
When a country is in a pressure cooker like Syria turning up the heat will cause much greater harm to the population overall. The evidence for this is everywhere but there are no better examples than Afghanistan and Iraq which, more than 10 years after US (and NZ in the case of Afghanistan) invasions and occupation, are more deadly and dangerous than ever for their local populations.
Left alone the Syrian people have the best chance to develop democratic civil society structures which over time will assert themselves against the myriad of lunatics and religious extremists whose influence rises in a pressure cooker.
We need to do our best to turn the heat down and start by condemning all foreign intervention in Syria and any US strike against the country.
It’s starting to look like Key would strangle his own mother if he thought it would gain him a few more Obama brownie points. So, as you say, it’s no wonder he immediately parrots the US position.
But Goff? Why the hell does he do the same? Why would anyone immediately assume the Assad regime are the ones who conducted this heinous act? Why would they? Just when a UN chemical weapons investigative team had arrived? The result – US military action against the Assad regime – was obvious, and benefits the rebels, not Assad.
Has everyone forgotten the WMDs that never were, that were the “justification” for the US to begin rampaging and killing more innocents because there’s oil in them thar hills?
What the hell is Goff thinking?
Goff was a neo-liberal in the 80s.
Leopards don’t change their spots.
This region has been fought over for thousands of years and any peace in a population that keeps score for millennia is near impossible. In recent history, the invalid establishment of Israel and the pillaging of the regions resources by the imperial powers who by a process of whispers and covert actions cast blame to keep the pot boiling.
It’s past time for everyone, (US France, Germany, UK & USA )to pull out of these regions of conflict to let the people sort out their differences. Any more interference like the US doing another drive by bombing will only generate more bad karma for the US and the western world.
Our politicians need a history lesson and a reminder of their duty to New Zealand.
I agree with John, this is going to end up as another Iraq/Afghanistan situation, in which Western military intervention caused more harm than good. But I do believe that intervention is needed in the form of humanitarian aid to the millions displaced within and outside the boarders of Syria. If we are indeed an international community, then we should be helping those most in need – the Syrian people. I propose that the money that the U.S are going to spend on their more than likely military invasion into Syria, be used for the purpose of humanitarian aid.
Medicine not missiles, doctors not soldiers, sustenance not weapons, political dialogue not war.
http://s0cialjustice.wordpress.com/2013/08/30/no-to-u-s-airstrikes-yes-to-aid-and-international-sanctions/
Of course ‘outside’ powers are competing to control Syria.
That happens in every war.
But in Syria the main fight since 2011 has been and remains that between the popular revolution and the Baathist regime.
In this fight Russia backs Assad. So does the US and Israel.
But the problem for his backers is that Assad’s genocidal repression has fuelled the revolution and the use of poison gas has poured more fuel on the fire. That’s why the squabbling between Obama and Putin is about how best to stop the revolution.
Obama’s hypocritical blustering is all about making Assad stick to conventional arms and stop embarrassing his backers at home.
US intervention will do nothing to advance the revolution and everything to prevent it.
The only ‘outside’ intervention is that needed for the revolution to succeed. Workers everywhere should go beyond protesting US and Russian involvement and start to provide material aid to the revolution enable it to overthrow Assad and at the same time stop the Jihadis from turning a democratic revolution into an Islamic state.
http://syriafreedomforever.wordpress.com/2013/08/31/we-stand-behind-the-syrian-peoples-revolution-no-to-foreign-intervention/
Quote from John Mintos article:
“Prime Minister John Key’s response has been predictable. He says he will consider New Zealand supporting a US attack even without a UN mandate. Challenged that this would be illegal under international law Key says such a government decision would be justified morally because of the horrific use of chemical weapons. John Key’s selective morality is consistent with National’s slavish alignment with US foreign policy.
Labour’s Phil Goff is little better. Rather than condemn a possible US-led attack on Syria Goff hedges around the issues more afraid to offend the US than assert a moral or legal position.”
Yes, it is just so typical, and it shows so clearly, John Key and his government have clearly done backroom deals with the US, to ensure them full allegiance and support, and what Key has been doing with his comments, is nothing but “warming” the media and public to the idea of assisting a US strike of sorts, and at least offer some support, whether it involves security and surveillance gathering as part of the ‘Five Eyes’ alliance, or “moral”, political or any other non combatant support.
Goff does not surprise at all, and we know where he has stood during the many years he has been in politics, in or outside of governments.
As for Syria, it is a drama, a shocking drama that is continuing to unfold. And feeling the despair and pain of the ones affected there, I almost started to give in to the idea, that some strikes by the US or any alliance of countries may offer some relief, after hearing the media announcements by Kerry and others yesterday.
It is not that easy though, as we already have not just US navy ships assembling in the Eastern Mediterranean, there are Russian Navy, Israeli navy, possibly French navy, indeed also a German vessel equipped with spying technology on board, possibly also Iranian vessels assemble there!
Hezbollah are making noises in Lebanon, there have recently been more unrest and protests by Shiite dissidents and supporters in Bahrein (hardly noticed), which is home to the largest US base in the region, there are ongoing frictions between Shiites and Sunni in Yemen, Saudi Arabia, certainly also in Syria itself, in even regions in Iran, and this is extremely explosive a scenario there.
The Russians will not allow the US to take action and bomb Assad out of office, as that will leave them with no remaining strategic hold in the region. The US already have to some degree got Iraq on their sides, the military in Egypt is in charge again, and despite of criticism, the US are not unhappy about this, Israel has its own concerns and agendas, and the US will never let them face major security challenges, Saudi Arabia will be defended by the US, same the government in Bahrein. Do not forget Turkey also, having strategic interests.
This is now a war by fractions, and as John Minto writes, it is a war where outside forces have their various interests at stake. That means for the people of Syria, of whom well over a million have already escaped, they will suffer for much longer yet, as nobody will march in and sort this out, if that is even possible.
But arming the opposition, and leaving Assad and his forces in place, that will be the alternative. The disunited opposition makes it even worse.
The UN is powerless as the Security Council will not be able to make a joint decision, as it seems, which would be the only way to have a unified action plan. The vetoes of China and Russia seem almost certain to allow the US to go ahead. To get the parties to the table will be undermined by extremist groups on the ground on Syria, as jihadist, islamic radical, extrmist forces will rather want to fight it out, to get the most stranglehold on the ground, so they can influence the future of Syria. Surely some extremists from the whole region are on the ground there now.
Our media, like most western media present a simplistic, superficial impression, between supposed “goodies” and “baddies”, and naturally they will count NZ along the former, alongside the US.
I am dismayed and feel sorrow and shame for seeing no real help and solutions for the people in Syria.
Lets not forget Iran, the real reason Syria is being destabilised.
Iran has the 3rd largest oil reserves in the world.
Iran sells its oil to Russia, india and china for gold not US dollars. This is the root cause of the problem. Iraq tried to= gone, Lybia tried next= gone.
Has eveyone forgotten the Iran nuke threat so soon?. Trust me, it will be back.
Iran also has a defence pact with syria and has been sending troops to aid Syria.
Id say the US missils will target the Russian anti aircraft gear (as its pretty much some of the best kit you can get), Then the isnazirael bomers will do one of those “We bombed you because A: we can B: you might use that on us”
What has happened to Phil Goff?. does he not do any home work?, scary.
Google Syrian Girl, great source of info from the ground.
[…] Syria By John Minto https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/09/01/syria/ […]
Comments are closed.