US President Barack Obama has finally warmed to the idea of arming and training Syrian opposition forces after quashing a similar plan touted by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and former CIA chief Gen. David Petraeus last February. He says he’s altered his mind because he has conclusive proof that the Assad regime has used chemical weapons against rebels, which he considers to be a red line. The move has generally gained the approval of US lawmakers, although many complain that it’s too little, too late.
Remember the old adage “he who hesitates is lost?” The Syrian conflict has been raging for two-and-a-half years. The UN says almost 93,000 have been killed. Millions have been made homeless; hundreds of thousands have sought safe harbor in neighboring countries. And until now, the so-called Leader of the Free World has talked the talk but failed to walk the walk, ignoring the urging of the UK and France to get proactive.
Former US President Bill Clinton has criticized his friend over his inaction, warning Obama that he risks being perceived as “a wuss.” There’s no doubt that the superpower’s credibility has taken a nosedive, which is probably the reason Obama has capitulated…or has he? Is he sincere about making a difference or is he merely dipping his toes in the water as a P.R. stunt?
By all accounts, Obama has little interest in implementing a no-fly zone over Syria preventing regime airstrikes. And he only intends to supply rebel fighters with relatively light weapons of the type they’re already getting via the back door from other sources, rather than much-needed sophisticated anti-tank and anti-aircraft guided missiles. This half-hearted approach will do little to tip the balance in the opposition’s favor when the other side has fighter jets, helicopter gunships, tanks and missiles, courtesy of Russia and Iran that has greatly bolstered the regime’s prowess with battle hardened Hezbollah guerillas and Iranian Revolutionary Guards.
The US president excuses his reluctance to fulfill the demands of opposition forces, saying he doesn’t want heavy American weaponry falling into the hands of militant groups linked to Al-Qaeda, such as Jabhat Al-Nusra that’s gained popularity due to its battlefield victories. Too much analysis leads to paralysis. Obama should decide once and for all which side he’s on and goes for it; else he’s merely prolonging the misery for all concerned. Yes, there are undesirables among the dissenters but when the opposition is fighting for the country’s future identity neither Obama nor anyone else has the luxury of being picky. However, Obama’s milestone announcement has further alienated Moscow with senior Russian government officials saying the Geneva-2 peace conference, scheduled for next month, may be in jeopardy. Russian President Vladimir Putin hasn’t pulled any punches with his response.
“You will not deny that one does not really need to support the people who not only kill their enemies, but open up their bodies, eat their intestines in front of the public and cameras. Are these the people you want to support? Is it them who you want to supply with weapons? Then this probably has little relation to humanitarian values that have been preached in Europe for hundreds of years,” he told reporters at a press conference.
Putin is suffering from chronic hypocrisy. True, Assad hasn’t been chomping on human organs as far as we’re aware, but his emissaries have been torturing and dismembering children, bombing apartment blocks with families still inside, and turning historic cities into Armageddon-type movie sets. And what moral platform does the Russian president have when he’s consistently used his country veto to block Western and Arab League attempts to censure the regime and plans to supply Assad with S-300 anti-aircraft missiles and advanced anti-ship cruise missiles, if he hasn’t already done so.
There is no magic pill here. But one thing’s for sure: More weapons means more blood spilled. Putin says the conflict can only be resolved through “political and diplomatic means.” If that’s the case, which it surely is, then he should start the ball rolling by quitting his testosterone-propelled stubborn stance long enough to work with the international community in putting an end to a human manufactured disaster that shames our planet.
Putin is in a position where he can make a difference. If he were disposed to drop his support for Bashar Assad and lean heavily on Tehran to keep its distance that would be a game-changer. Russia was geopolitically and financially burned by the US-led invasion of Iraq, which is why the Russian leader is digging in his heels over Syria that hosts a Russian naval facility on the Mediterranean. What’s to prevent Moscow negotiating a deal to keep its base with the National Security Council that umbrellas opposition groups as a condition for Russia’s backing?
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon is one of the few voices of common sense. He rightly says that this conflict has no military solution and so, the arming of either side “would not be helpful.” It’s tragic that his is one message that squabbling world powers don’t want to hear. They would rather continue their game of one-upmanship, no matter how many innocents are paying the ultimate price. There are high hopes for Geneva-2 but as long as the major players refuse compromise, I fear those hopes are destined to be dashed.
Email: [email protected]
