FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Tilting Towards Syria

by BINOY KAMPMARK

The recent escalation of tensions in Syria with the alleged use of chemical weapons against the civilian population is a cause of concern for the international community.  These attacks allegedly took place in the east and south-west of Damascus on Wednesday, purportedly killing hundreds.  There is, of course, one problem.  Both sides claim the other did it.  Syrian state television has been quick off the mark in suggesting evidence of rebel activity using chemical reserves.  Ditto the rebels, who see their great Satan incarnate in the form of Assad.

The war in Syria has become a battleground as much for Syrian factions split between Sunni and Shia as between various countries who see an interest in either overthrowing the regime of Assad, or finding a replacement more amenable to the “West”.  This has been the tragic lot of countries who find themselves on historical highways, routes where armies of various beliefs and faiths have traversed.  Their sovereignty tends to be at the mercy of movement and intervention.

The conflict now has numerous names in what is becoming a line dance of murderous calculation.  Russia and Iran, with their specific naval and military interests, provide the regime with support.  Qatar and Saudi Arabia have made no secret of their backing of anti-Assad forces.  One form of Sunni fundamentalism finds itself in a tussle with what amounts to secular despotism and Shia-backed fanaticism.

The argument for regime change, given that the United States, France, the United Kingdom and Australia, is much stranger than it seems.  The al-Nusra Brigade, a mortal enemy of Assad, has been deemed a terrorist organisation on the books of those who would prefer to deal with more palatable opponents of Assad. It is not the only one.  Weapons supplied for the Syrian opposition have wound their way to so called “illegal” groups, rather than moderate elements.  An armed solution would be a catastrophic one.

The Australian case is a pressing one, because it suggests that a military intervention against the Assad regime might be imminent.  A way of gauging imminent intervention by the United States is to watch how rapidly their allies jump to attention. It might come in the form of a certain remark by the British foreign secretary William Hague, who is already convinced that chemical weapons were, in fact, used. Or it might come in the form of Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s jerky response in returning to Canberra for security briefings on the subject.

The signs are those of war, though Rudd, so far, has suggested that the UN weapons inspectors will need to ascertain what happened on the ground.  Other countries have also suggested that this is the wise course of action.  The longer this investigation is delayed, the less likely evidence will be found.

An empirical approach is required as to whether chemical weapons were used, and by whom.  It was precisely that which proved conspicuously absent when it came to finding “evidence” of Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq. War is undesirable; war by fraud, even more so.

The history of interventions in such countries as Afghanistan and Iraq show the dangers of bloody and destabilising adventurism.  Australian commitments to such adventures, often at the expense of international law, have proven costly and extensive.  The global refugee problem is due, in no small part, to such incursions.

The sanctity of Parliament has been overridden by executive fiat at various stages of Australian history.  To a large extent, this is the condition of the Westminster system: an executive which stems from Parliament itself tends to rush matters through without much regard of the public and its representatives.  This, sadly, has assumed the air of bipartisan support.  It is a feature of politics that must change.

In the final analysis, there are few humanitarian solutions to humanitarian crisis, certainly at the end of the gun.

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne and is running with Julian Assange for the Australian Senate in Victoria. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

 

 

 

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

More articles by:
June 29, 2016
Diana Johnstone
European Unification Divides Europeans: How Forcing People Together Tears Them Apart
Andrew Smolski
To My Less-Evilism Haters: A Rejoinder to Halle and Chomsky
David Rosen
Birth-Control Wars: Two Centuries of Struggle
Sheldon Richman
Brexit: What Kind of Dependence Now?
Yves Engler
“Canadian” Corporate Capitalism
Lawrence Davidson
Return to the Gilded Age: Paul Ryan’s Deregulated Dystopia
Priti Gulati Cox
All That Glitters is Fearsome: Whatever Happens, Don’t Blame Jill Stein
Franklin Lamb
About the Accusation that Syrian and Russian Troops are Looting Palmyra
Binoy Kampmark
Texas, Abortion and the US Supreme Court
Anhvinh Doanvo
Justice Thomas’s Abortion Dissent Tolerates Discrimination
Victor Grossman
Brexit Pro and Con: the View From Germany
Manuel E. Yepe
Brazil: the Southern Giant Will Have to Fight
Rivera Sun
The Nonviolent History of American Independence
Adjoa Agyeiwaa
Is Western Aid Destroying Nigeria’s Future?
Jesse Jackson
What Clinton Should Learn From Brexit
Mel Gurtov
Is Brexit the End of the World?
June 28, 2016
Jonathan Cook
The Neoliberal Prison: Brexit Hysteria and the Liberal Mind
Paul Street
Bernie, Bakken, and Electoral Delusion: Letting Rich Guys Ruin Iowa and the World
Anthony DiMaggio
Fatally Flawed: the Bi-Partisan Travesty of American Health Care Reform
Mike King
The “Free State of Jones” in Trump’s America: Freedom Beyond White Imagination
Antonis Vradis
Stop Shedding Tears for the EU Monster: Brexit, the View From the Peloponnese
Omar Kassem
The End of the Atlantic Project: Slamming the Brakes on the Neoliberal Order
Binoy Kampmark
Brexit and the Neoliberal Revolt Against Jeremy Corbyn
Doug Johnson Hatlem
Alabama Democratic Primary Proves New York Times’ Nate Cohn Wrong about Exit Polling
Ruth Hopkins
Save Bear Butte: Mecca of the Lakota
Celestino Gusmao
Time to End Impunity for Suharto’’s Crimes in Indonesia and Timor-Leste
Thomas Knapp
SCOTUS: Amply Serving Law Enforcement’s Interests versus Society’s
Manuel E. Yepe
Capitalism is the Opposite of Democracy
Winslow Myers
Up Against the Wall
Chris Ernesto
Bernie’s “Political Revolution” = Vote for Clinton and the Neocons
Stephanie Van Hook
The Time for Silence is Over
Ajamu Nangwaya
Toronto’s Bathhouse Raids: Racialized, Queer Solidarity and Police Violence
June 27, 2016
Robin Hahnel
Brexit: Establishment Freak Out
James Bradley
Omar’s Motive
Gregory Wilpert – Michael Hudson
How Western Military Interventions Shaped the Brexit Vote
Leonard Peltier
41 Years Since Jumping Bull (But 500 Years of Trauma)
Rev. William Alberts
Orlando: the Latest Victim of Radicalizing American Imperialism
Patrick Cockburn
Brexiteers Have Much in Common With Arab Spring Protesters
Franklin Lamb
How 100 Syrians, 200 Russians and 11 Dogs Out-Witted ISIS and Saved Palmyra
John Grant
Omar Mateen: The Answers are All Around Us
Dean Baker
In the Wake of Brexit Will the EU Finally Turn Away From Austerity?
Ralph Nader
The IRS and the Self-Minimization of Congressman Jason Chaffetz
Johan Galtung
Goodbye UK, Goodbye Great Britain: What Next?
Martha Pskowski
Detained in Dilley: Deportation and Asylum in Texas
Binoy Kampmark
Headaches of Empire: Brexit’s Effect on the United States
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail