Syria: Dark and smoky tunnel! -Dr. Abdul Ruff
______
It appeared a light, at long last, was fast
appearing in the Syrian tunnel and soon peace shall be prevailing in the war
torn Arab nation filled with plenty of energy resources. May powers have been
competing for Syrian resources directly from
the government and through rebel forces.
It, however, turned out to be yet another illusion in West Asia- the target of
ant-Islamic nations!
.
Post fragile truce
Those who thought the war being waged by top
world powers, USA and Russia in Syria would end soon after the fragile truce,
are not once again disappointed that war is taking a new twist with Syrian
forces, backed by Russia and the rebel fighters supported by USA accelerating the
war in Sunni dominated Syria after having declared a ceasefire.
The fact is USA is not keen to end wars in Syria and ending war won’t give
Russia anything special. The important figures in Pentagon have condemned the
US-Russian cease-fire in Syria, disallowing the military to kill more Muslims.
They call for the overthrow of President Bashar al-Assad, and fro which
advocated a major escalation of the US-NATO intervention in Syria—arming the
Islamist opposition with anti-aircraft missiles and other weapons. They argue
ending the war without archiving the main objective is bad for US invasion
polices in future.
For USA, short of an agenda that includes a
comprehensive agreement for Bashar al-Assad to step down and allow a transition
toward a non-Islamic or so-called pluralist government, no cease-fire stands a
chance in that war-torn country. Without a balance of military forces on the
ground in Syria, which would compel the Assad regime and its Iranian backers to
seek real compromise, a genuine political settlement is not possible. In other
word, what the Neocons nuts want is a perfect regime change in Syria but to
which neither Assad nor his Russian supporter Putin is agreeable. Both seek
status quo.
The Neocons criticize Obama for having failed to militarily exploit the
concocted “poison gas” episode of 2013 to overthrow Assad and bring the
opposition to power and say the truce should be used to re-arm US-backed
“revolutionary” militias fighting alongside the Al Qaeda-linked Al Nusra Front.
They attacked the Obama government for lacking the appetite for a major
confrontation with Russia. In fact, the issue of creating a balance of
forces—especially by providing the Syrian opposition with anti-aircraft
missiles capable of limiting the Syrian regime’s use of air power, its main
weapon of large-scale destruction—has been the principal bone of contention on
Syria within the Obama government since 2012. Their “outrage” forgets the
US-backed Saudi bombing and blockade in Yemen, which has killed thousands and
threatens hundreds of thousands of children with starvation.
US Neocons, including the strong Jewish
contingent, are least concerned about the sectarian massacres carried out by
the US-backed Islamist opposition in Syria, and the bloody record of US
imperialism itself—whose wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria have still
claimed a far greater toll than the Kremlin’s Syrian intervention. If anyone in
the region had any illusion about the democratic and humanitarian pretexts
invoked by Washington in previous wars, they have lost them completely by now.
Mischief
Unlike truce, which may mean a break from
hostilities, a cessation of hostilities provides a more formal designation
which falls short of a formal ceasefire signed by the warring parties. It is
considered as the first essential step to resolving a conflict, notably to
permit the delivery of humanitarian aid. Russian efforts and subsequent Western
reactions have emerged as a tragedy in contemporary international relations.
Against this backdrop, the reasons behind the crisis need to be identified and
the unified role of the world community should be determined.
Unfortunately, with a series of military strikes in Syria in support of their
respective parties, tensions have now flared both at home in Syria and outside,
giving an impression that the Syrian ceasefire plan will succumb to failure.
The efforts towards the 'cessation of
hostility in Syria' brokered by the USA and Russia and backed by the UN,
require a unified role by the regional and global powers. Without global unity,
ceasefire activities must fail. The irony is that global measures to find a
peaceful solution to the problem are evident, there have been concerns over the
truce violations by the great regional and global powers.
For Russia, Bashar's government is as democratic as the Saudi government. In
other words, if the Saudi government can be supported by the democratic
America, the Syrian government should, in principle, also be supported by them.
The US president Obama is not at all interested
in ending war in Syria or elsewhere as he is now entirely focused on an ‘exit
strategy’—not an exit from the Syrian crisis or West Asia in general, though,
but his own exit from office. His main worry is to help Mrs. Clinton to win the
presidency to prove that his legacy saved the Democratic Party. He has
dutifully promoted American militarism and US imperialism.
Obama is a clever operator who often thinks several moves ahead of his
domestic, though not his foreign, adversaries. US policy paved the way for
Assad’s revival, Iranian and Russian success in Syria, and the massacre of up
to half a million Syrians. In 2013, Iran told Obama that if he were to strike
the regime of Bashar Assad following the latter’s chemical-weapons attack, the
Iranians would end the talks over their nuclear program. Obama duly canceled
the strike and later reassured Iran that the USA would not touch Assad. Obama’s
Syria policy serves Iran’s interests.
America’s settled policy of standing by while half a million Syrians have been
killed, millions have become refugees, and large swaths of their country have
been reduced to rubble is not a simple “mistake”. Rather, it is a byproduct of
America’s overriding desire to clinch a nuclear deal with Iran, which was meant
to allow America to permanently remove itself from a war footing with that
country and to shed its old allies and entanglements in the Middle East, which
might also draw us into war.
A no-fly zone would have prevented much of the carnage — and presumably
virtually all of carnage rained down from the air — that has occurred. But a
no-fly zone would have thwarted Iran’s ambitions. Russia’s presence in the air
over Syria provided Obama with an excuse for rejecting a no-fly zone. But the
White House had firmly rejected such action for years before the Russians were
anywhere near Syria. It seems likely that Obama welcomed Russia’s direct
intervention since it served Iran’s interests and made it much easier for Obama
to defend not taking military action.
Indeed, Obama sees Russia as a partner in Syria. Initially, US line was that
Russia had made a tragic mistake by becoming involved in a quagmire. Now, White
House officals argue that Russia holds all the cards in Syria and that our only
option is to work with the Kremlin.
With an insincere USA working for peace without seriousness, Russia and Iran
hold all the cards on Syria because essentially Obama allowed them to. Obama
allowed them to because he wants Iran to prevail. One might admire the elegance
of Obama’s “strip tease,” if not for the demise of hundreds of thousands of
Syrians and the triumph of arch-enemy in Tehran.
In a joint statement by the
United States, France, Britain, Germany, Italy and the European Union, the
international community placed the onus for bringing an end to the Syrian civil
war on Russia. In a statement, the countries wrote, “The burden is on Russia to
prove it is willing and able to take extraordinary steps to salvage diplomatic
efforts.” The effort came as the battle for the high-ground surrounding Aleppo
intensified, with bombing by Russian jets described as “relentless” pounding
the area non-stop as Moscow’s protégés, the Syrian army, fought for control
against the rebel forces. Despite the show of a short ceasefire, the Russian
military has since backed President Assad’s effort to gain control of Aleppo
with a massive offensive that has so far resulted in “scores” of deaths. US
Secretary of State John Kerry, who worked for weeks to create the brief
ceasefire ostensibly with the Russians, is now clearly at odds with President
Putin as he pleads for an end to the aerial assaults. In addition to about
300,000 deaths since the civil war began five years ago, some 11 million
Syrians have been displaced from their homes. The post Onus is on Russia to
Bring Peace to Syria
Syria
It's true that Syria's internal and external
factors, including economic backwardness, unemployment, inflation and
corruption springing from the dictatorship of Bashar al Asad, have been
responsible for its political instability. However, the much more dangerous
challenge emanates from its leaders' failure to construct the Syrian nationhood
and consolidate its statehood by binding the different religious factions such
as Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds into one integrated nation. Without paying
attention to its eco-historical, geopolitical and anthropological construct,
extreme dictatorship was imposed which worked as a major barrier to its
national consolidation. Thus, on the micro sub-systemic level, Syria became
highly destabilized and disorganized, while on macro systemic level, Syria
remained disintegrated and fragmented.
The ethnic Sunni Muslims form the majority of Syrian population, which has been
ruled by the minority Shiites. Syrian leaders failed in the grand task of
national homogenization of its people comprising of different religious and
ethnic groups. More dangerous than the domestic factors is the involvement of
global powers in enlivening the ongoing crisis. Global powers have historically
exercised influence and domination in the Arab world through their Arab
stooges. Dictatorial rulers in most Arab countries have turned out to be either
pro-west or pro-Russia. The USA and its western allies extend political,
economic and military assistance and cooperation to Saudi Arabia and other gulf
states, in order to expand their spheres of influence as the Cold war strategy
and similarly, Russia sides with Syria to combat the US policy. Thus, the
countervailing strategies of the erstwhile superpowers are solely responsible
for the tragic incidents developing in Syria.
USA cannot end terror wars abroad as the Neocons continue calling for the
escalation of US wars in the Middle East and aggression against China and
Russia. Obama introduced the Asia pivot for this purpose. However, a CSIS
report on nuclear war that dismissed the destruction of India and Pakistan—that
is, the slaughter of hundreds of millions of people—as economically
unimportant. More organizations are being integrated and recruited to play
major roles in imperialist politics. The organizations and tendencies that were
in the leadership of anti-war protests earlier, especially in the late 1960s
and 1970s are now shamelessly pro-war. Convergence ahs occurred among various
sections of political organization- left and right, for instance to support
fascism, Zionism, colonialism and imperialism - resented by US led NATO.
Peace efforts, starting from the 70th General
Assembly of 2015 to the present ceasefire plan upheld by the USA and Russia
with UN support, are threatened by the contrasting policies of the two great
powers. According to political analysts, their countervailing strategies risk
plunging the West and Russia into a crisis not seen since the Cold War. Russian
efforts and subsequent Western reactions have emerged as a tragedy in
contemporary international relations. Against this backdrop, the reasons behind
the crisis need to be identified and the unified role of the world community
should be determined.
In order to end the crisis, the international
community, especially the US, the EU and Russia, need to come out of this
psychology of this 'power zeal' while framing their policies regarding the
war-torn country. Both Russia and the West should find a peaceful and
diplomatic way of resolving the Syrian crisis based on mutual understanding and
friendship. Any effort to use force by Russia would only tickle the sleeping
tigers of the cold war era, and lead the world to the verge of total
destruction.
Syrian war, if not stopped is likely to turn to a complete war, involving
nuclear arsenals that may even burst into a nuclear confrontation. History has
laid the giant responsibility on the United Nations to bring all regional and
global powers, especially the erstwhile superpowers, to work together to
resolve the issue. The UN as well the global powers need to adopt sincere,
transparent and pragmatic policies in order to save the world from another
global devastation. The unanimity of global powers can resolve the Syrian
conflict. If the UN fails in that, it falters in its mission for which it came
into existence.
The West should understand the reality of Russia's concern to defend its naval
base in Tartus and strategic base in Caspian Sea from where Russian jets flew
combat missions. It's little wonder that the erstwhile superpower Russia would
be adamant to protect its military base and nuclear arsenals, and that self
defense would be its bottom line.
The continuous failure of a Syrian ceasefire has brought another significant
question to the limelight: whether the Syrian war will at all end in the
foreseeable future or the suffocating situation in the war-run country will
trigger a regional cold war or a grand global war.
|