Power, you know, is a curious disease. It makes you feel virtuous, urges
you to use that power, selectively, on imaginary threats, encourages you to
build more power and more importantly makes you think you are superior to
others and that you have the right to intervene in the lives of others. The
United States of America is afflicted by such a disease. This contagious
disease originated from the UK and France, past superpowers and faltering economies
who still wish to think they are powerful. These self proclaimed Guardians of the World
see no use for the designated Guardian, the United Nations, in running the
affairs of the world.
We are
of course talking about Syria, a country torn due to a mismanaged version of the
mismanaged Arab Spring. It is being destroyed from within and outside, with
rebels being aided by the Western and allied powers and the government supported
by Russia and Iran. Education system is dead, economy has collapsed, inflation
has shot up, hospitals are destroyed and government mechanisms do not exist
anymore.
Compare
the following two quotes.
"When you start talking
about chemical weapons, in a country that has the largest stockpile of chemical
weapons in the world, where over time, their control over chemical weapons may
erode, where they're allied to known terrorist organizations that, in the past,
have targeted the United States, then there is a prospect, a possibility, in
which chemical weapons that can have devastating effects could be directed at
us. And we want to make sure that that does not happen.”
"Iraq has
chemical and biological weapons, that Saddam has continued to produce them,
that he has existing and active plans for the use of chemical and biological
weapons, which could be active within 45 minutes. . .and that he is actively
trying to acquire nuclear weapons capability”
Don’t they sound very similar and very similarly far-fetched?
The second was from the speech given by Tony Blair to the British people to
justify the Iraq War and the first was by Barack Obama. Yes, the only Nobel
Peace Prize Winner to head a country that owns as many nuclear weapons,
fighter planes and warships that all other countries combined. The Peace Prize
laureate also abandoned a country they invaded with the most absurd of claims,
is planning to abandon the next and lost their Ambassador in another misstep in
a third.
It was actually fascinating to
observe how “evidence” of chemical use by Syrian government flowed from “traces”
to “mostly credible” to “undeniable” over a couple of weeks. The evidence is
anyways based on Israel’s intelligence, questionable sources amongst the rebels and
the fact the UN officials were too late to reach the spot. Interestingly, Al-Qaeda is fighting with the rebels as is the USA. Till recently,
Al-Qaeda was Enemy No.1 for the US, but now has apparently been usurped by the Hezbollah.
So, what are the less absurd
reasons that US has now to attack Syria?
- Syria has violated the Chemicals Use convention which it never ratified anyway
- Syrian weapons will land into the hands of people who may hurt United States and its allies. This obviously means Israel, but no-one seems to remind the President that Al-Qaeda can also end up controlling the weapons
- Iran will become more powerful, an obvious paranoia that Israel is obsessed with
- The President’s ego is at stake. Syria has refused to heed his warning, it has to be punished. Well, yeah, Obama is the presiding deity of Syria
- The UN Security Council motion will be vetoed by Russia and China, which, in essence, means they won’t be deceived like with the Libyan Resolution
And what are the reasons quoted by the US politicians and
media against US unilateral military action?
- American soldiers’ life will be at stake. John Kerry has this wise solution that we will bomb Syria from our safe Nuclear warships stationed all across the Mediterranean Saudi Peninsula
- This is an action without a plan
- Will put tremendous stress on the US economy
- We do not have UK to share our burden
- But McCain takes the cake here. He says that the action is not hawkish enough, that the attacks have to be heavier, more disproportionate
Did any of you here notice that Syrian people, their well
being or their wishes have not been mentioned in the entire discourse at all? At
best, it appears as a footnote.
What is the plan of action? What
will happen after you destroy the chemical weapons? What if Iran gets involved
in the War? What do the people of Syria want? What about the rebels? What after
Assad? Do we have any plan for the Syrian people’s health or education? What
about Democracy in Syria? What are the lessons from Iraq, Afghanistan and
Libya?
There are no answers to these. Actually,
the western powers act as if these questions don’t exist at all.
Amidst
all this, two questions arise. If a couple of countries can assume control of
the world, what is the United Nations for? If the IBSA countries have to rise
above the current level of emerging nations, what is their role in these
conflicts? Does it end with statements like “exercise caution” and “adhere to
people’s aspirations”?
Well, as I said, Power is a curious disease. Rome, Greece, Spain, the Papacy, Britain and USA have behaved the same way. 100 years hence, when China or some other country rules the world, I am afraid they will behave the way. History repeats itself.
