Sometimes, my friends, I take a look at one or another political/diplomatic
situation, and I think, “This is just sooo outrageous. So
counter-intuitive in terms of how things ‘should’ be. How do I deal with
it?” Actually, on occasion it occurs to me that if a satirical film were
made incorporating some of the events we are witnessing, critics would pan it as
too far-fetched. Such is the world about which I try, however humbly, to
provide some perspective.
Today I want to begin with the horrors to our north in Syria, where, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights
[an anti-Assad group], the death toll from the civil war has now exceeded
140,000, including more than 7,500 children and over 5,000 women.
The UN has stopped updating its records on those killed, because gathering
the information has become too dangerous. So we can call this an obscene
farce.
An official for the Observatory says the toll is probably considerably
higher – by as much 60,000 – than what is cited, because both sides deliberately
try to obscure the amount of damage they’ve endured.
“The Observatory would like to point out that these statistics do not
include the fate of more than 180,000 people missing inside the regime’s
prisons. Nor does it include more than 7,000 detained by regime
forces and armed groups loyal to it, or the hundreds of people kidnapped [by
rebel groups.]
“It is shameful that the international community has done nothing to show
that it will defend human rights...The Syrian people dying are just statistics
to them.”
In the second decade of the 21st century – the world has learned less than
nothing.
~~~~~~~~~~
It has been noted that since a second round of peace talks for Syria began
a month ago, the rate of deaths has increased: the month has been the bloodiest
of the civil war.
And those talks have fallen apart, yielding nothing. A stalemate in
the talks yesterday led to their collapse after 30 minutes. The Assad
regime balks at discussion of a transitional government, and insists on focusing
on combatting terrorism (with the government definition of “terrorists”
encompassing a good part of the rebel forces).
International mediator Lakhdar Brahimi issued an apology to the Syrian
people for the lack of progress in the talks. “I am very very sorry and I
apologize to the Syrian people that their hopes, which were very very high here,
that something will happen here.”
~~~~~~~~~~
No date has been set for the next round of talks, but Brahimi has suggested
that the first day be devoted to stopping violence and combatting terrorism,
with discussion of a transitional government to then follow.
“Unfortunately the
government has refused, which raises the suspicion of the opposition that in
fact the government doesn’t want to discuss the TGB [transitional governing
body] at all.
“In that case, I have
suggested that it’s not good for the process, it’s not good for Syria that we
come back for another round and fall in the same trap that we have been
struggling with this week and most of the first round. So I think it is
better that every side goes back and reflect and take their responsibility: do
they want this process to take place or not?”
~~~~~~~~~~
These are rhetorical questions Brahimi is posing: the answers are
obvious. And that’s what makes it such a farce. There is no way to
approach two warring parties and come to a peaceful compromise unless both
parties are on board, and this is clearly not the case. Assad is fighting for
his political and literal life. Period. He will not come to terms
unless he is required to do so, and the sort of force that is necessary
to compel him is simply not forthcoming.
Allow me to remind my readers that in late August of last year, Obama was
set to hit Syria with a few Tomahawk Cruise missiles fired from well off-shore,
as retribution for (or warning with regard to repetition of) Assad’s use of
poison gas on his civilian population. Then, very suddenly Obama called
off the operation (referred to by Kerry as “incredibly small”) that had been in
place.
It later emerged that Obama refrained from hitting Syria at Iran’s behest.
The president was deep into negotiations with Iran, which is every bit as much a
farce if not more so (and I shall return to this); Obama was in appeasement
mode.
~~~~~~~~~~
A “tremendous diplomatic victory” was then said to have been put in place,
with Obama acceding to a Russian plan for Syria to surrender its weapons of mass
destruction. See? Problem solved. Except I didn’t see, nor did a
whole lot of other observers. Was there a reason to trust either Syria or
the Russians on this?
Now it turns out that Syria has missed a deadline for turning over its
cache of chemical weapons, with only 5% of its supply having
been surrendered yet. At first it was said this was simply a logistical
delay, and that it would happen. Now there are reports that Assad is
stocking piling the weapons in the region of the country that is an Alawite
stronghold (west Syria and along the coast
around Latakia up to the Turkish border), against the time when he
may be forced to relinquish control of other parts of Syria. A sort of
“insurance.”
~~~~~~~~~~
Obama had no compunction in saying in his State of the Union address
that Syria's chemical weapons "are being
eliminated" thanks to American diplomacy.
However, my very favorite administration
statement on the situation came from White
House Press Secretary Jay Carney last week. Officials were keeping up the
pressure on Assad regime, he explained: "They have an obligation here. They have committed to
doing this."Oh.
~~~~~~~~~~
At the end of last week, Obama met in California with Jordanian King
Abdullah, whose country is struggling under the onslaught of fleeing Syrian
refugees. In the course of his broader statement, the president said
that:
“There will be some intermediate steps that we
can take applying more pressure to the Assad regime and we are going to be
continuing to work with all the parties concerned to try to move forward on a
diplomatic solution.”
I would suggest here that the American president is the very embodiment of
tragic farce.
~~~~~~~~~~
There is a great deal more to say, and I will return to this.
I close the subject for today by noting, hardly for the first time, that
there are no easy answers, no good guys, in this situation. The more
moderate rebel forces – which were not adequately supported by the US when
they might have been - have in some considerable measure been coopted by
more radical groups, with outside forces coming in; the situation is enormously
complex. The nation of Syria, such as it was, is on its way to
self-destruct.
~~~~~~~~~~
Let us turn then, just briefly here, to some issues
regarding our putative “peace partner.” This is no less farcical.
A group
of some 250 left-wing Israeli students - whose own positions I see as terribly
sad, because they so thoroughly miss the boat - paid a call today on Mahmoud
Abbas in Ramallah.
Abbas
told them that there can be no discussion of Jews living in “Palestine”
because “settlers cannot be compared to
Palestinians who have lived here for thousands of years.”
And here, too, I have a favorite line:
“I
admit,” Abbas is quoted as saying, “that there is Palestinian incitement, which
plagues chances of peace. But it can't be used as an excuse to not reach a
deal."
~~~~~~~~~~
Abbas says (above) that Hamas is with him in peace efforts.
Hamas, however, says that it would treat NATO forces (which Abbas proposed
replace the IDF) as an occupier on “Palestinian” territory. Declared a
Hamas spokesman, Sami Abu Zuhri, "No Arab country
will agree to the desecration of one centimeter of its lands."
Were (and this is purely hypothetical) the PA truly on board for peace, it
would be pointless in any event to negotiate: the PA, whatever Abbas’s claims,
does not represent all of the Palestinian Arabs. In point of fact, Hamas
would be likely to overtake the PA, were the IDF to pull out. And Hamas is
anti-peace.
This is all an exercise in futility. And there is considerable reason to
believe that Abbas is on his way to calling it quits.
~~~~~~~~~~
© Arlene Kushner.
This material is produced by Arlene Kushner, functioning
as an independent journalist. Permission is granted for it to be reproduced
only
with proper attribution.
If it is
reproduced and emphasis is added, the fact that it has been added must be
noted.
This material is transmitted by Arlene
only to persons who have requested it or agreed to receive it. If you are
on the list and wish to be removed, contact Arlene and include your name in the
text of the
message.
No comments:
Post a Comment