The
blood spill in Syria never stops.
It
is almost three years now ever since the rebellion against the Syrian
President, Bashar al-Assad first erupted following the massive Arab Spring. The
entire globe has witnessed in the past three years many sovereign states in the
Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region “enraging” with hatred and
dissenting attitude against the regional leaders. Initiated by the Jasmine
Revolution in which a fruit seller is said to have immolated himself, the Arab
Spring grew into world-shaking affair. Dictators in Libya, Tunisia, Yemen and
Egypt were toppled “successfully”, but not without innocent lives being slain.
The Arab Spring is said to have “inspired” many other happening throughout the
world, citing the 2011 pro-democracy demonstration in mainland China and the
“Occupy Wall Street” movement as examples.
When
Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali, former President of Tunisia was ousted by the people’s
power in late 2010, the virus was yet to spread into other neighbouring
countries. Gradually, like wildfire, the anti-dictatorship force moved into
other nations such as Egypt and Libya, and affecting the Shiite-majority
country, Syria. Yet, what remains interesting in the Syrian case, whilst the
dictators in other countries were removed from office, Bashar al-Assad is still
standing strong.
The
Syrian carnage has always been pressing from day one. In spite of various
reports that have emerged pertaining to the number of casualties in the Syrian
civil war, an accurate number is unlikely to be identified. Approximately, more
than 100,000 lives are massacred and even more are displaced due to the
on-going crisis. Seeing this happening, a smart question may pop-out…why hasn’t
any international action taken to remedy this manslaughter?
Actually,
seeing the severity of the civil war in Syria, the United Nations’ Security
Council (UNSC) has long ago mooted the idea of sending United Nations’ military
intervention to Syria, in order to halt the blood spill. This, nevertheless,
never materialised as al-Assad’s ally, Russia was quick to veto against any
military intervention. This was followed suit by People’s Republic of China as
to their opinion, a domestic crisis is best to be solved by a country’s own
nationals. So, apparently, it was three against two fight amongst the permanent
members of the UNSC.
Acknowledging
this failure, the Arab League and UN joined forces to form a Syrian crisis task
force to mediate between the rebels and the President of Syria. Initially, this
task force was led by the former Sec-Gen of UN, Kofi Annan. After series of
investigations and rounds of diplomacy, Kofi Annan braved himself to resign,
dictating briefly yet strictly, international military intervention is a must
to put a halt to this civil war. Posthumously, Lakhdar Brahimi was appointed to
succeed Mr Kofi Annan and more rounds of talks and mediation entails, while
more and more lives are lost in Syria.
Recently,
Syria again made its headlines as the sub-urban area of Damascus was said to be
shelled by chemical agent. Hundreds if not thousands of Syrians are sent to the
hospitals, with most diagnosed to suffer from muscle and nerve failure, most
likely caused by hazardous nerve agent. This has prompted President Obama to
reveal his planning in sending US army for strikes in Syria. Despite military
actions are not sanctioned by the Security Councils of UN, US and its possible
allies may launch attacks under the name of NATO. This has been done
previously, in the case of Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya.
However,
this plan is yet to be confirmed. As of now, the US Congress is deliberating on
approval of such attack (interestingly, many Congressman from the Democratic
Party and the GOP approve). However, in United Kingdom, David Cameron was left
red-faced when the Parliament has disapproved any attack on Syria. Obviously,
with the loose coalition government in United Kingdom now, this Tory prime
minister is highly unlikely to join the United States in any form of attack on
Syria. So far, only the President of France, Francois Hollande has made his
case clear that France is ready for any action to be taken on blood-soaked
Syria.
When
the Obama administration revealed that military attacks may be launched against
the Syrian army for using harmful nerve agents in its civil war, many sceptics
continue to question President Obama’s credibility. After being elected as the
first Afro-American president of America, Barack Obama caught worldwide
attention as he revealed his intention to mend America’s relationship with the
Arab world. Thus, any attack plan on Syria should sound contradicting to his
previous stand.
Pundits
and analysts have also assumed that Israel may have connections in regards to
this sudden change. To elaborate, Israel is a Jewish state, landlocked within a
Muslim-majority region. The Israel-Palestine problem has long irked and angered
the rest of the Muslim world. Iran, especially together with Hezbollah from
Lebanon has always posed much threat to the security of Israel. This is much
notable as when the new President of Iran, Hassan Rowhani has sent his greeting
wishes for the Jewish New year, the Israeli Prime Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu has received it with much scepticism.
But,
how does this exactly link up with Syria? To the uninitiated, Iran and
Hezbollah are allies to the current President of Syria, Bashar al-Assad. Thus,
with the possible destruction of the al-Assad power in Syria, threats against
the security of Israel will be reduced significantly.
To
cut it short, it is unfortunate to witness an entire state failing to provide
security for its own citizens. While international understandings such as the
“Fourteen Points by Woodrow Wilson” and the “1648 Peace of Westphalia” dictate
that a fate of a country should be left to its own nationals, the international
bodies like United Nations and others cannot stay put and do nothing due to
political affiliations. Actions need to be taken before these 100,000
casualties grow into millions.
