When Obama Turned His Back on the Syrian People

“Realpolitik and the cynicism of the state are difficult to couple with assisting a population in danger.”

This is the cry of anger of a Beirut daily against Obama’s U-turn.

Between dillydallying and bellicose speeches, soothing remarks and reiterated threats, a certainty emerges from the confusion: The Syrian people are going to continue to suffer and pay with their lives for the lack of decisiveness on the part of Western democracies and fear of the so-called “free world” to follow through on its convictions. The Syrian people will continue to be victims of the cynicism of those who flex their muscles, but who know full well to limit themselves to simply showing off.

From the start, let us not forget the European nations that fell off the face of the earth: Only France and the United Kingdom launched an attack before the “imperatives of democracy” restored them to order. In this respect, Barack Obama plays the role of the master of ceremonies — one day he is a bully and the next someone who respects opposing opinions.

Let us also not forget the explanations and justifications the opportunistic warmongers have given. We are happy to get involved and teach Bashar al-Assad a lesson for using chemical weapons against the citizens of Syria. But hang on — overthrowing him is out of the question, as is challenging the institutions or changing the political equation. Assad has received this message. Units of the Syrian army were quickly repositioned, and his weapons of mass destruction have been deployed. These are the very same weapons that will be used again against the Syrian population now that President Obama has put a military solution on hold and his credibility at stake.

Let the Syrians alone manage to oust the tyrant. They must be able to do it under the shelling of the regime, under the air raids, or under a shower of devastating missiles. Dying by chemical weapons is “unacceptable and intolerable,” but “dying like a dog,” under the blows of an army that is barbarous and genocidal is in keeping with the “rules of the game,” as the new “righters of wrongs” seem to be implying.

A missile strike and surprise will suffice in sending a message.

Messages of reassurance sent in all directions followed weeks of procrastination, hesitations and warning shots. How surprising, therefore, that the public could revolt, pose legitimate questions and ask about the consequences of an operation with hypothetical goals. This intervention took British Prime Minister David Cameron as its first victim in front of a skeptical parliament — an affront that the House of Representatives could yet mete out to Obama, with its full assent.

Whether it was poor aim or an error in calculation, the result is more than obvious: Suddenly, obstructionist Russia is changing into a preacher of lessons in democracy, and Iran — very prudent until now — threatens “shoddy invaders” with thunderbolts and Israel with the promised apocalypse.

And that is where we are at the start of the week: a suspended, if not canceled military operation, and threats from Barack Obama that nobody is taking seriously. This is a sad spectacle for a devalued democracy, trailed through the mud by its many adversaries — a lamentable conclusion to weeks of hesitation put to profit by dictators more determined than ever. It would have been enough, however, if one moonless night, a targeted strike were carried out without drums or trumpets, an attack that would have caught the whole world off guard and allowed the eradication of the evil at its roots, liberating Syria of its tyrant and the population of its torturers in one stroke. But it is difficult to couple realpolitik and the cynicism of the state with assisting a population in danger.

This is the problem. This why the same assassins will continue to kill, hound and humiliate the people in Syria and for a long time to come. And once again, eyes will close in order to make sure that neither consciences nor the international order are disturbed.