Syria and International Cynicism.
It is unquestionable that the Arab Spring has impacted both the region and the world. The international community observed since 2010 how the Middle East started uprising almost all of a sudden and, these movements influenced other groups around the world. Inside the main reasons for which these uprisings started were the claim for democracy, respect to basic liberties (such as freedom of speech) and, in general, claiming for legitimate election processes in the public sphere as well as for equal opportunities.
After Tunisia, Egypt followed and then Libya after a long process full of violence that led NATO to get in there around the air at some point. Most people remember the images of Muammar Gadafi being killed being broadcasted worldwide, and these images are still kept in Libya under the idea of 'not forgetting'. Indeed, there are still other places in which mobilisation continues however, Syria has become one of the most complicated ones happening now and that has attracted the most of the world's attention. I would like to mention that this is a mere opinion from an outsider and that my views do not represent, by any means, the absolute truth.
The world was shown in the beginning that the movements being given in Syria were directed towards the claim for democracy and later for the removal of Bashar al-Assad. The outrages and protests did produce the effect on the government and started acting against these movements. Later Syria was suspended from the Arab League. Today however, many people have lost the main point of this movement, because now we have a terrible civil war that has led thousands of people to flee from their homes and thousands more being killed, and even worse, some now regard this as a sectarian conflict.
Media worldwide has shown the conflict only through apparently simple facts of 'The opposition did this/the government forces did that' the problem is, that after more than a year of fighting and killing, media from certain countries are giving 'convenient' information, for they only accuse the Syrian government of bloodshed, when the 'rebels' have done similar and even worse things. The day in which the former U.S. Secretary of State said that 'they would support rebels' things were just starting to make sense: a movement that started 'in the name of democracy' is now turned into a sectarian one between Sunnis and Shiite's.
The rebels cannot label themselves as the fighters for equality and democracy if they have been going around killing people from other religions, such as Christians. There have been acts performed by the rebels that can easily fall into human rights violations (like torture, rape an violence against women).
Sadly, the Syrians being displaced and killed represent the least of the interests for the involved parts. It is a huge cynicism that the United States denounces 'the Syrian regime's violations of human rights' and 'underwater' helping the other violators with financial assistance and weapons. They are not the only interested parts here, Sunni factions are too and they are anyway violating a fundamental principle in Islam in which killing another Muslim is a sacrilege. The worst of all this, is that they are dragging others (such as Palestinians and bombing Lebanon on the way, as always) into their game of words for justifying their actions (or their help and support to the rebels).
Syria has a privileged position in terms of geopolitics, it is like Turkey, another gateway to the Middle East and to Iran of course. I do not doubt that some interested country with its interested allies could be supporting the rebels for destabilisation purposes to Iran but, the biggest mistake they are committing is thinking that the world does not realise these things. Now we have some country speaking with the Taliban..,I mean, WHAT? They were hating each other a week ago and now they are having negotiations? I believe that there is something in need here, let's wait and see what both the Taliban and the country in question ask on exchange.
This is the game of power, the game of international relations, and I for one, after speaking to a Syrian friend of mine, hate the fact that some countries just do not care about finishing with entire populations for their interests. Anyhow, as I read somewhere else once: 'The one who cooks poison will taste it at the end'. I believe in realism inside international relations, but as a serious and professional internationalist, I dislike hypocrisy and cynicism in the name of national interest, moreover when innocent lives are at stake.
After Tunisia, Egypt followed and then Libya after a long process full of violence that led NATO to get in there around the air at some point. Most people remember the images of Muammar Gadafi being killed being broadcasted worldwide, and these images are still kept in Libya under the idea of 'not forgetting'. Indeed, there are still other places in which mobilisation continues however, Syria has become one of the most complicated ones happening now and that has attracted the most of the world's attention. I would like to mention that this is a mere opinion from an outsider and that my views do not represent, by any means, the absolute truth.
The world was shown in the beginning that the movements being given in Syria were directed towards the claim for democracy and later for the removal of Bashar al-Assad. The outrages and protests did produce the effect on the government and started acting against these movements. Later Syria was suspended from the Arab League. Today however, many people have lost the main point of this movement, because now we have a terrible civil war that has led thousands of people to flee from their homes and thousands more being killed, and even worse, some now regard this as a sectarian conflict.
Media worldwide has shown the conflict only through apparently simple facts of 'The opposition did this/the government forces did that' the problem is, that after more than a year of fighting and killing, media from certain countries are giving 'convenient' information, for they only accuse the Syrian government of bloodshed, when the 'rebels' have done similar and even worse things. The day in which the former U.S. Secretary of State said that 'they would support rebels' things were just starting to make sense: a movement that started 'in the name of democracy' is now turned into a sectarian one between Sunnis and Shiite's.
The rebels cannot label themselves as the fighters for equality and democracy if they have been going around killing people from other religions, such as Christians. There have been acts performed by the rebels that can easily fall into human rights violations (like torture, rape an violence against women).
Sadly, the Syrians being displaced and killed represent the least of the interests for the involved parts. It is a huge cynicism that the United States denounces 'the Syrian regime's violations of human rights' and 'underwater' helping the other violators with financial assistance and weapons. They are not the only interested parts here, Sunni factions are too and they are anyway violating a fundamental principle in Islam in which killing another Muslim is a sacrilege. The worst of all this, is that they are dragging others (such as Palestinians and bombing Lebanon on the way, as always) into their game of words for justifying their actions (or their help and support to the rebels).
Syria has a privileged position in terms of geopolitics, it is like Turkey, another gateway to the Middle East and to Iran of course. I do not doubt that some interested country with its interested allies could be supporting the rebels for destabilisation purposes to Iran but, the biggest mistake they are committing is thinking that the world does not realise these things. Now we have some country speaking with the Taliban..,I mean, WHAT? They were hating each other a week ago and now they are having negotiations? I believe that there is something in need here, let's wait and see what both the Taliban and the country in question ask on exchange.
This is the game of power, the game of international relations, and I for one, after speaking to a Syrian friend of mine, hate the fact that some countries just do not care about finishing with entire populations for their interests. Anyhow, as I read somewhere else once: 'The one who cooks poison will taste it at the end'. I believe in realism inside international relations, but as a serious and professional internationalist, I dislike hypocrisy and cynicism in the name of national interest, moreover when innocent lives are at stake.
Comentarios
Publicar un comentario