After my earlier post about Syria today, I saw that I had received an email from a reader who complained that I was wrongfully blaming president Obama for inaction regarding the slaughter of civilians in Syria. this is such an important issue that it merits more than just a return email. Everyone needs to understand just what Obama has done here.
In the last month, as the number of dead approached 10,000 and the Assad regime made heavy use of artillery and tanks against its own cities, other countries decided that they could no longer stand by and just watch. The members of the Arab League as well as Britan and France were going to help the Syrian opposition with weapons to defend themselves. Obama vetoed the idea. American opposition stopped the plan from moving forward. Instead, Obama supported the peace efforts of the UN Secretary General which have now failed so spectacularly.
Let me quote for you all a part of a column from Amir Taheri on the subject:
On the first day of the UN-brokered cease-fire, Assad’s forces killed 40 to 50 demonstrators, close to the daily average for the past year. Government troops remained present everywhere — with a few token withdrawals staged to provide TV footage for those in the outside world who wish to be deceived.
Assad’s snipers, the notorious shabbiha (“armed thugs”), were also actively pursuing their campaign of random killing, designed to terrorize demonstrators.
Annan insists that “both sides” must respect his cease-fire. But the fire that has killed almost 10,000 Syrians always came from the regime’s side. The unarmed demonstrators never had a chance of firing back. The Free Syrian Army, composed of deserters from regime forces, desperately tried to put up a fight but could not for want of weapons, air cover and safe havens.
A majority in the Arab league and some Europeans, especially France and Britain, wanted to provide all that — but had to hang back because of strong opposition from Washington.
“Obama vetoed the arming of the Free Syrian Army,” a senior Arab official claims. He adds that Arabs had been prepared to arm the FSA without US funding. All they wanted was “political and diplomatic support” from Washington, with its “great symbolic importance.”
American moral support was especially needed to persuade Turkey and Jordan to open humanitarian corridors and set up safe havens for Syrian refugees.
Washington officials claim that they have brought Russia “on board.” But Russia was always on board as long as there was no question of ditching the despot Bashar al-Assad.
The Annan mission is a success for Assad and his patrons in Tehran. First, they transformed a political fight into a humanitarian issue. Next, with Russian collusion, they established moral equivalence between the despot and his victims. “Both sides have the right to express their views,” Annan keeps repeating, in what sounds like the notorious dictum about “five minutes for Jews, five minutes for Hitler.”
No comments:
Post a Comment