With the increasing likelihood that the Assad regime in Syria has now deployed widespread use of chemical weapons against rebels, there are increasing calls for international intervention. I agree with Dr Alf that it is critical for there to be hard evidence before international intervention; in terms of that intervention, in my view, it must be supported by the international community, ideally the United Nations.
Yesterday, Dr Alf reblogged several articles on this story. Let me share my views below:
President Obama and the international community need to behave with extreme caution because until there is solid proof of the use of Sarin gas or other nerve agents by him and his troops, acting precipitously would be a potential trigger for World War 3.
Gerasimov, the top Russian General, has said publicly on RT (interview on line), that attacking Iran,(Syria is the precursor), would be treated as an act of war.
We know from the Pentagon’s own original plans which General Wesley Clarke was shown by his former colleagues (see the General speaking on You Tube), that the intention was and still perhaps is, to “take down” regimes in Syria, the Lebanon, Yemen, Somalia, Iran and Libya.
This, whilst allowing Israel to take more Palestinian land.
We know too that the French, ourselves (in the UK) and America want to seize mineral wealth in Africa, starting with Mali and then, through the use of Africom and our own special forces; these countries have minerals that China needs for its economy.
General Martin Dempsey, America’s top General does not want to invade Syria because he does not believe that whoever came after Assad would have American or Western interests at heart and because with Afghanistan needing to be stabilized America has its hands full until such time as enough XE contractors are in place to replace withdrawing American troops in 2014 and thus bolster the Afghan National Army. His wise counsel should prevail because the consequences of an Al Qaeda controlled Syria and a growing Muslim Caliphate and World War 3, are a lot worse than anything Assad might do.
I fear that Israel, which seems to be controlling American foreign policy, is going to get its way, despite the wise counsel of General Martin Dempsey, as described in his letter to legislators and can be seen on-line (See Foreign Policy Review).
They, and people like David Cameron, and those who are prone to act before they think, should remember the old Chinese proverb “Be careful what you wish for”
Even if America and the West does act and Russia sits on its hands, has anyone though through the aftermath?
Occupying the country, resettling or allowing to perish, millions of refugees?, the rise of Al Qaeda? the probability of a hard-line Muslim dictatorship replacing Assad and wanting to spread trouble everywhere?
If Russia and China do not sit on their hands, then have we thought through the consequences?
From where I sit and to quote General Dempsey,”there are no good options”.
We should leave well alone and attend to our own problems at home.
Germany is putting self-interest and commonsense first.
It has economic interests in China and Russia, centered on exports and engineering and has considered the much worse consequences of intervention in Syria, which General Martin Dempsey, America’s top General has outlined with full knowledge of the facts backed up by war-gaming exercises using the Pentagon’s Wisdom Warfare system.
Angela Merkel, the Chinese and the Russians do not want or seek World War 3 and General Dempsey in America, most ordinary people everywhere do not seek it either.
Toppling the Assad regime is not going to stop bloodshed and the creation of refugees it will create more of them and more trouble for all us.
Angela Merkel sees that, but France with its basket case economy and weak-willed President Hollande, sees military adventurism as a useful distraction from his problems at home.
Invading Syria is not European policy but is the policy of countries like France and ourselves under Cameron which have a tendency to open their mouths first and think afterwards.
If, for example, as David Cameron wants, Turkey is given EU membership as a reward for attacking Syria, we can expect that large numbers of Turks would want to settle in the UK, perhaps taking our population up to 80, 90 or 100 million within a few short years, France might find the same, so Germany has already said no and told David Cameron what they think about EC enlargement.
Before engaging in war, you need to be certain of victory, prepared for the occupation and reconstruction which follows and have considered and decision treed all the consequences which might emerge.
In the case of Syria, the UK and France have not thought through the full consequences or spelt them out to their people honestly.
Assad is a brutal dictator but he is not an Adolf Hitler or Stalin threatening our security or vital interests, so we should stop attempting to meddle in matters which are not our business. Unless they do and people agree on the basis of hard evidence,we should not intervene and the German position of standing pat is the right one based on hard-headed realpolitik as opposed to moralistic posturing and rushing in where Angels fear to tread.
- US military reportedly updates list of potential targets in Syria as pressure mounts on Obama (jpost.com)
- Israel said expecting US military response in Syria (timesofisrael.com)
- Pentagon moves ships toward Syria as US weighs military options (jpost.com)
- Obama plays down US intervening in Syria (news.yahoo.com)
- US forces move closer to Syria as options weighed (timesofisrael.com)
- Official: US military updates options for possible strikes on Syria (cnn.com)
- Obama plays down US intervening in Syria (hosted.ap.org)
- Obama faces growing calls to act over Syria gas attack allegations (reuters.com)
- Syria attack may prove to be a game changer (irishtimes.com)
- Obama faces more calls to act on Syria (news.yahoo.com)