West Redoubles Efforts to Push Syria into Civil War
Published in People's Daily
(China) on 19 July 2012
by Jia Xiudong (link to original)
(China) on 19 July 2012
by Jia Xiudong (link to original)
Translated from
by Nathan Hsu.
Edited by Lydia Dallett.
Two months ago, the United States, Europe and other nations were still repeatedly expressing their support for a political resolution of the crisis in Syria. However, up until now, their policy decisions and actions on the Syrian issue have instead been pushing Syria toward all-out civil war.
On July 18, a suicide bombing rocked Syria's national security headquarters in the capital, Damascus, killing Defense Minister Dawoud Rajha in the attack. For days, Damascus has been an uninterrupted hotbed of fierce urban warfare between government and rebel armed forces from the suburbs to the heart of the city. Various signs indicate that the situation in Syria is continuing to deteriorate, and that the country is currently sliding into civil war.
Lately, there has also been some trouble within the United Nations Security Council. Because the mandate for the UN monitoring mission in Syria ends on the 20th of this month, the Security Council must pass a resolution for an extension. Western nations took the opportunity to propose a draft invoking Chapter Seven of the United Nations Charter in a bid to pave the way for broadening sanctions on Syria, as well as for future military intervention. Russia opposed the measure, proposing another draft of the resolution sans the aforementioned clauses. The nations thus began an intense contest centered on the two drafts.
It is not difficult to see that disturbances within Syria are linked to that within the Security Council, a distant echo. This is not to say that the two are in perfect harmony, but rather shows that certain forces are seizing this opportunity to stir up trouble and influence public opinion. As the Arab League sent observers to Syria, the UN Human Rights Council held a meeting, the Syria "action group" called together foreign ministers in Geneva and the Security Council convened to discuss the situation, various attacks occurred within Syria, which one would be hard pressed to say was mere coincidence.
In fact, after the bombing in Damascus, France claimed that Assad's struggle to maintain power was futile; the spokesman for the French Foreign Ministry publicly appealed to Assad's supporters to lay down their arms. Perpetrators of Syrian internal violence and external advocates of overthrowing Assad have a tacit understanding, and indeed have a certain synergy between them, as their goals at this stage are identical in forcing Assad to step down.
The experience of Kofi Annan's six-point peace plan has been similar. The United States, Europe and other nations have expressed oral support for the plan, but have not given support in their actions. They continue to favor the Syrian opposition, invariably emphasizing the need for Assad to resign. After the Houla massacre in May, and before investigations had made clear the true nature of the incident, Western nations leaped to announce that the Annan plan had failed. After the Syrian opposition unilaterally announced that it would no longer respect the ceasefire agreement, the West did not raise a peep of dissent. By doing this, they encouraged the opposition and other armed forces not to make concessions, creating an even sharper standoff between the opposition and the government. This further disproves that Annan's plan lacked the ability to mediate within the Syrian conflict.
Two months ago, the United States, Europe and other nations were still repeatedly expressing their support for a political resolution of the crisis in Syria. However, up until now, their policy decisions and actions on the Syrian issue have instead been pushing Syria toward all-out civil war. If not changed, this will inevitably lead to further bloodshed and conflict, and greater humanitarian disasters and regional turmoil.
When Russia and China vetoed the Security Council resolution to intervene in Syria, the United States ambassador to the United Nations chastised the two countries, saying that they were "on the wrong side of history." However, looking back on the "history" of Western military intervention in Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan, their record is decidedly lackluster. That is a history best left unrepeated in Syria.
On July 18, a suicide bombing rocked Syria's national security headquarters in the capital, Damascus, killing Defense Minister Dawoud Rajha in the attack. For days, Damascus has been an uninterrupted hotbed of fierce urban warfare between government and rebel armed forces from the suburbs to the heart of the city. Various signs indicate that the situation in Syria is continuing to deteriorate, and that the country is currently sliding into civil war.
Lately, there has also been some trouble within the United Nations Security Council. Because the mandate for the UN monitoring mission in Syria ends on the 20th of this month, the Security Council must pass a resolution for an extension. Western nations took the opportunity to propose a draft invoking Chapter Seven of the United Nations Charter in a bid to pave the way for broadening sanctions on Syria, as well as for future military intervention. Russia opposed the measure, proposing another draft of the resolution sans the aforementioned clauses. The nations thus began an intense contest centered on the two drafts.
It is not difficult to see that disturbances within Syria are linked to that within the Security Council, a distant echo. This is not to say that the two are in perfect harmony, but rather shows that certain forces are seizing this opportunity to stir up trouble and influence public opinion. As the Arab League sent observers to Syria, the UN Human Rights Council held a meeting, the Syria "action group" called together foreign ministers in Geneva and the Security Council convened to discuss the situation, various attacks occurred within Syria, which one would be hard pressed to say was mere coincidence.
In fact, after the bombing in Damascus, France claimed that Assad's struggle to maintain power was futile; the spokesman for the French Foreign Ministry publicly appealed to Assad's supporters to lay down their arms. Perpetrators of Syrian internal violence and external advocates of overthrowing Assad have a tacit understanding, and indeed have a certain synergy between them, as their goals at this stage are identical in forcing Assad to step down.
The experience of Kofi Annan's six-point peace plan has been similar. The United States, Europe and other nations have expressed oral support for the plan, but have not given support in their actions. They continue to favor the Syrian opposition, invariably emphasizing the need for Assad to resign. After the Houla massacre in May, and before investigations had made clear the true nature of the incident, Western nations leaped to announce that the Annan plan had failed. After the Syrian opposition unilaterally announced that it would no longer respect the ceasefire agreement, the West did not raise a peep of dissent. By doing this, they encouraged the opposition and other armed forces not to make concessions, creating an even sharper standoff between the opposition and the government. This further disproves that Annan's plan lacked the ability to mediate within the Syrian conflict.
Two months ago, the United States, Europe and other nations were still repeatedly expressing their support for a political resolution of the crisis in Syria. However, up until now, their policy decisions and actions on the Syrian issue have instead been pushing Syria toward all-out civil war. If not changed, this will inevitably lead to further bloodshed and conflict, and greater humanitarian disasters and regional turmoil.
When Russia and China vetoed the Security Council resolution to intervene in Syria, the United States ambassador to the United Nations chastised the two countries, saying that they were "on the wrong side of history." However, looking back on the "history" of Western military intervention in Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan, their record is decidedly lackluster. That is a history best left unrepeated in Syria.