FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Law and Not War in Syria

by TABITHA TROUGHTON

In what world does bombing a country on the pretext of bringing peace make sense? This is not quite a rhetorical question. Here in the UK we see the results all around us, from Libya and Iraq to the fundamentalist insanity which rules what is left of Afghanistan. But the answer is one which most of us know already. As the wheels of war speed up (Parliament is being recalled! Blair speaks out!), the majority of the British public oppose armed intervention in Syria. Stop the War UK are calling for an emergency demonstration outside Downing Street, which perhaps 0.001 percent of people will have the opportunity to attend. The placards on its web page read, optimistically, ‘Hands off Syria’ – hands are not the problem here. Bombs are the problem: the lethal stockpiles amassed by the West, which one imagines sitting there in their thousands, issuing a low, robotic, irresistible siren call. “Use us. Use us”.

And what an opportunity this presents for the UK’s de facto rulers to bring a few truths home to those still laboring under the illusion that our elected representatives should do what they are paid to do, and represent us. We see Michael Gove, as Education Secretary, claiming that our Parliament has been lucky, so far, to have been kept informed. Any serious decisions, says the man responsible for our schools, should be left in the hands of the Prime Minister and the ‘national security council’. What Syria should have to do with our ‘national security’ is clear: nothing. “If the inspectors find incontrovertible evidence that the gas attacks were carried out by an opposition group, does this means that the West will take military action to support the Assad regime?” asks a commenter in the Guardian. It is a good question. In reality we see both the US and the UK indicating that they will not be influenced by any of the UN’s findings, nor rely on a mandate from the Security Council. Our Parliament is being recalled, but the intention to attack has already been made clear, and the evidence on which our MPs, or those who turn up, are expected to vote has been dismissed in advance.

This is, in one way, hardly surprising. But one wonders, as Iran – a democratic state which Blair has also been keen to attack – gets pulled into the whole explosive mess, how many Germans, in World War Two, sat and watched with horror as Hitler attacked country after country; powerless and, eventually, resigned. Hitler, of course, had a problem which the West and its allies (the coup leaders in Egypt now included) do not have. He needed hundreds of thousands of men on the ground to fight his wars; the result was a necessary blitz of propaganda and terror aimed at his own people. Our warmongers need no such thing: they have the technology. And Iraq has taught them other lessons, including the fact that there is no need to lie about UN resolutions, or proof, before going in for the kill. Consequences do not exist, unless you count Blair’s subsequent role as the public face of Louis Vuitton. Whatever we say, whatever anyone thinks, they will, apparently, go ahead anyway.

The ongoing tragedies are obvious, and the shame palpable. The dangers for escalation outside Syria (itself included in an update of the ‘Axis of Evil’ in 2002) are apparent. The consequences for the people inside Syria, already dying in the so-called superpowers’ games, are inevitable. A group called Radical Beirut are calling it clear. “Foreign military intervention in Syria is unacceptable and condemnable, whether it comes from Hezbollah, Russia, Iran or the Americans, Turkey or the Arab countries. Syrians are the only ones who should determine the fate of their country” they write. “On the other hand, foreign military intervention …does not erase the crimes of Assad and his regime and does not erase his being a tyrant and a criminal against humanity…Military strikes will serve the Assad regime who will kill people under the pretext of resistance to foreign interference, and the regime will appear to be a heroic resistance to imperialism and “terrorism”. At this stage, we need moral clarity to support people in the face of power and freedom in the face of tyrants and occupation”.

We in the UK, under our own, smooth-talking autocrats, can surely agree with that. Luis Moreno-Ocampo, the International Criminal Court’s former prosecutor, said, back in November, that world leaders had a ‘good case’ for preparing a warrant to arrest Assad. Such a move, the former judge noted, ‘would force Assad to negotiate’. He was ignored, and the bloodshed by Assad’s regime, and by the increasingly crazed, and Western-backed rebels, has continued. If this world were a sane one, and the UK government possessed a fraction of the morality it claims as its own, it would be working with the UN to arrest Assad, not preparing to bomb the people of an already devastated country to punish ‘him’.

Still, it is tempting to imagine this country’s reaction had a thousand UN peacekeepers, or representatives of the countries who stood firm against Iraq, turned up at the Houses of Parliament to arrest Blair and his inner circle. Possibly, most people here would have cheered. But, judging by our government’s own actions, there would have been no need for them to stick with international law. They could have just bombed us. Our MPs should be encouraged to reflect on this equivalence. The ‘debate’ which the more radical MPs have been demanding is, based on the Iraq precedent, nonsensical; the terms already fixed.

They need to be told to act.

Tabitha Troughton is a a freelance journalist and has written for various publications, including the Sunday Times, Morning Star. Tabitha has reported on Afghanistan, Pakistan, Abkhazia, Iceland, and the student protests in the UK. Her first novel “Animals” was published by Simon & Schuster.

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

January 23, 2017
John Wight
Trump’s Inauguration: Hail Caesar!
Patrick Cockburn
The Rise of Trump and Isis Have More in Common Than You Might Think
Binoy Kampmark
Ignored Ironies: Women, Protest and Donald Trump
Gregory Barrett
Flag, Cap and Screen: Hollywood’s Propaganda Machine
Gareth Porter
US Intervention in Syria? Not Under Trump
L. Ali Khan
Trump’s Holy War against Islam
Gary Leupp
An Al-Qaeda Attack in Mali:  Just Another Ripple of the Endless, Bogus “War on Terror”
Norman Pollack
America: Banana Republic? Far Worse
Bob Fitrakis - Harvey Wasserman
We Mourn, But We March!
Kim Nicolini
Trump Dump: One Woman March and Personal Shit as Political
William Hawes
We Are on Our Own Now
Martin Billheimer
Last Tango in Moscow
Colin Todhunter
Development and India: Why GM Mustard Really Matters
Mel Gurtov
Trump’s America—and Ours
David Mattson
Fog of Science II: Apples, Oranges and Grizzly Bear Numbers
Clancy Sigal
Who’s Up for This Long War?
Weekend Edition
January 20, 2017
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Divide and Rule: Class, Hate, and the 2016 Election
Andrew Levine
When Was America Great?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: This Ain’t a Dream No More, It’s the Real Thing
Yoav Litvin
Making Israel Greater Again: Justice for Palestinians in the Age of Trump
Linda Pentz Gunter
Nuclear Fiddling While the Planet Burns
Ruth Fowler
Standing With Standing Rock: Of Pipelines and Protests
David Green
Why Trump Won: the 50 Percenters Have Spoken
Dave Lindorff
Imagining a Sanders Presidency Beginning on Jan. 20
Pete Dolack
Eight People Own as Much as Half the World
Roger Harris
Too Many People in the World: Names Named
Steve Horn
Under Tillerson, Exxon Maintained Ties with Saudi Arabia, Despite Dismal Human Rights Record
John Berger
The Nature of Mass Demonstrations
Stephen Zielinski
It’s the End of the World as We Know It
David Swanson
Six Things We Should Do Better As Everything Gets Worse
Alci Rengifo
Trump Rex: Ancient Rome’s Shadow Over the Oval Office
Brian Cloughley
What Money Can Buy: the Quiet British-Israeli Scandal
Mel Gurtov
Donald Trump’s Lies And Team Trump’s Headaches
Kent Paterson
Mexico’s Great Winter of Discontent
Norman Solomon
Trump, the Democrats and the Logan Act
David Macaray
Attention, Feminists
Yves Engler
Demanding More From Our Media
James A Haught
Religious Madness in Ulster
Dean Baker
The Economics of the Affordable Care Act
Patrick Bond
Tripping Up Trumpism Through Global Boycott Divestment Sanctions
Robert Fisk
How a Trump Presidency Could Have Been Avoided
Robert Fantina
Trump: What Changes and What Remains the Same
David Rosen
Globalization vs. Empire: Can Trump Contain the Growing Split?
Elliot Sperber
Dystopia
Dan Bacher
New CA Carbon Trading Legislation Answers Big Oil’s Call to Continue Business As Usual
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail