 |
| Syrian President Bashar al-Assad pictured with a mustache befitting a young teen aged boy |
Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad, in his first major speech since the collapse of peace talks in Geneva last April, vows to retake every inch of Syria from his foes, Assad credits the liberation of Palmyra as proof of his purpose and openly defies the United States, as well as allies Russia and Iran, whose desire is a peaceful transference of power in Syria. The International Syria Support Group, headed by Secretary of State John Kerry as well as 16 other world leaders, had seen guidelines as well as deadlines, June 1st being the most recent, broken by the failed state. Citing humanitarian concerns, a classic concern of Liberalist diplomacy, Kerry and others have hinted that the United States has not put the idea of military escalation out of the question, a foreign policy measure that President Obama is not likely to take in the waning months of his administration claiming that there is no real American interest in the Syrian civil war. Assad rejects the new peaceful transference deadline of August 1st and is reportedly embolden in his actions by the support of Russia, which is under question by the US for allegedly attack non-ISIS insurgent groups who are backed by the United States.
The
Syrian war has been a bloody and seemingly endless conflict that has created a
refugee crisis of over 2.5 million Syrians fleeing the region. Hundreds of
thousands of lives have been claimed by the civil war. Assad’s unwillingness to
cede power as well as many reports and accusations of human rights violations,
as well as the threat of ISIS which is a dominant force in the region causing
an outcry from the American public over provocative executions of Christians,
has cause many nations and IGO’s to decry the civil war. While Assad’s
government has few supports Russia has proven to be a powerful ally in the
fight to bring the government back under the Shia favoring Assad government.
The
use of Humanitarian Intervention is part and parcel for liberal, or Wilsonian,
diplomats and foreign policy experts. While in a more realist view that sees
global intervention predicated on whether or not national interest plays into
said intervention, Liberal foreign policy sees a moral obligation, as well as a
Democratizing effect, of engaging in these interventions. Kerry represents such
a school international diplomacy which is a bit ironic because his claim to
fame came from his opposition to the Vietnam War, a war that was predicated on
the good will Democratizing of the nation in an effort to fight communism in
the Cold War (similar parallels could perhaps be drawn to War on Terror viz
Syria). Humanitarian Intervention has a moralistic ring to it, by helping developing
and war torn regions the world becomes more and friendlier to Democratic
nations. Yet Humanitarian aims can be used as an excuse for imperialism, more
cynically a cry for an intervention in the Middle East calls into question the
continued involvement of the US in the region for the last 15 years. Whether
Kerry is sincere is his desire for Humanitarian Intervention, and a creation of
a more United States friendly Syria, or is merely continuing the confusing
course of action that gave impetus to the Afghan and Iraq wars remains to be
seen.
Obama, perhaps rightly though I will leave my
subjectivity out of this, claims that a militarized intervention in Syria is
not befitting on national interests, the American people are war weary as it
is. Often switching between Realist and Humanitarian style foreign policy, in the
case of Syria Obama is perhaps seeking to secure his legacy of ending wars,
though there remains some limited military involvement in both Iraq and
Afghanistan, than starting wars.
The Civil War in Syria seems to have no end in
sight and a second deadline for a transference of power has been set for August
1st, what sanctions The International Syria Support Group intends
for a violation of deadline was not specified in the article. Assad has largely
ignored all demands made by the organization, including blocking humanitarian convoys
providing food and aid at the border, and stood firmly in opposition to a 17
nation body that demands he steps down. Syria has also opened up a proverbial
can of worms between the United States and Russia, the former questioning
Russia’s relationship with Syria as being in opposition with foreign policy
aims in the Middle East. With no end in sight the recent revelations are yet
another dreary chapter in the Syrian Civil War, which has without question caused
a great deal of havoc in diplomatic relations between nations the world over,
from refugee disputes in Europe to a renewed power struggle between the United
States and Russia, one can only hope it comes to comparatively more peaceful
and uncomplicated ending.Source:
No comments:
Post a Comment