29 March 2012 By Mshari al-Zaydi The man appears completely out of his depth. Can
you believe that he made these statements at the same
time that pro-regime Shabiha militia were carrying out
an appalling and horrendous massacre in Homs that
resulted in the deaths of dozens of women and
children, in a shocking scene that was completely
indifferent to international condemnation? Annan said that he was "optimistic" following a
second round of talks with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad
on Sunday. However he also acknowledged that it's
going to be "tough" to reach an agreement to stop the
bloodshed. Speaking to journalists in Damascus, he
added "it's going to be tough. It's going to be
difficult but we have to have hope." Annan explained
that there was a general desire for peace in Syria,
adding "I am optimistic for several reasons." I do not understand Annan's optimism, nor do I
understand how UN Secretary-General [Ban Ki-Moon] can
be so sanguine about Annan's mission in Syria. The reality that everybody is trying to dismiss,
with the exception of Saudi Arabia and the majority of
the Gulf States, is that what is happening in Syria is
a revolution to oust a brutal regime, not just
"differences in opinion" or demands for limited
reform. The Russians are failing to differentiate between
the victims and the perpetrators in Syria. More than
this, they are leaning towards the perpetrators, and
this is immoral, false, and a distortion of the facts
on the ground. What is even more unfortunate is that
the Arab League seems to have acquiesced to this
during the recent meeting between Russian Foreign
Minister Sergey Lavrov and other Arab foreign
ministers in Cairo. Regrettably, Arab League
Secretary-General [Nabil Elaraby], the disciple of
Mohammed Hassenein Heikal, has endorsed this
disgraceful agreement between the Russians and the
Arabs on the Syrian crisis. It is preposterous to compare the pro-regime
Shabiha militia, who have raped women and killed
children in Homs and Hama, with their innocent
civilian victims. This comparison, in itself, is
another despicable crime. There are those who say that what happened in Cairo
between the Russians and the Arabs constitutes a
breakthrough in the rigid Russian position that is
supportive of the al-Assad regime. This emanates from
the belief that Arab League and UN resolutions will be
the launch pad for resolving the Syrian crisis, and
that ultimately, such resolutions will ensure that the
regime – or to be more precise, that Bashar al-Assad
and his cronies – relinquish power in the same manner
as the Yemeni scenario. However in my own view, this
is overly optimistic. Russia is fighting with the west
over the dead bodies of the Syrian people. For Russia,
Syria is a theatre of war with the West, even if this
comes at the expense of the innocent Syrian people.
This is a battle over regional interests and security,
not a struggle over a humanitarian or moral issue. It was claimed that the Russian position was
subject to the presidential election in Russia, and
that if Putin won this election – as he did – then the
escalatory tone that was being employed by Russia to
provoke a sense of national patriotism, would slowly
soften. However, the Russians rushed to reassert their
"strong" stance on the Syrian crisis, which was no
different than their original position. The core of
the Russian position focuses on aiding the al-Assad
regime to hold out, and promoting the theory – which
is solely held by the Damascus regime – that a
"balanced" conflict is taking place between the regime
and the Syrian uprising, or the "armed gangs", as is
reported by the al-Assad media. In reality, attempting to obtain a Russian stance
congruent with the Arab and particularly the Gulf
stance, in order to save the Syrian people from the
atrocities that are being committed by the al-Assad
regime, is like chasing a mirage. Russian political discourse – in the same manner as
Chinese political discourse – does not focus on
humanitarian or moral dimensions. This political
discourse views everything in a purely geo-political
manner. Hence, it regards the Syrian scene as a
stereotypical Cold War battle, and they cannot be
blamed for that. After all, you cannot ask a stranger
to share your pains! I believe that "ignoring" the Russians and the
Chinese, i.e. not being overtly hostile toward them,
is the ideal solution. We should endeavour to resolve
this crisis without any consideration for the Russians
and their followers in Beijing. Some might view this idea as being unrealistic. But
facts indicate that if three specific countries
decided to sincerely join forces and coordinate with
one other, then the brutal al-Assad regime would
collapse sooner rather than later, and at a far lesser
cost. Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Jordan, in the region
surrounding Syria, are the countries capable of
tipping the balance and disciplining the pro-regime
Shabiha militia. This solution does not need a miracle; rather all
that is required is for the Syrian opposition to be
given political and international legitimacy, namely
through the recognition of the Syrian National Council
[SNC]. If the SNC were provided with buffer zones in
Jordan and Turkey, they could resist and surround the
pro-regime Shabiha militia from the north and the
south, namely via Bab al-Hawa and Jisr ash-Shugur in
the north and Deraa in the south. In addition to this,
it would also not be difficult or costly to arm the
Free Syrian Army [FSA], providing it with weapons like
RPGs in order to counter the al-Assad regime's
helicopters. Indeed merely providing explicit political support
and weapons to obstruct the free movement of the al-Assad
regime's tanks and aircraft would be more than
sufficient to topple the regime. This would allow the
Syrian opposition to redress the mismatch of forces
and increase the defections from the al-Assad regime.
We do not need international or regional
"consensus" in order to support the Syrian people;
particularly as such "consensus" has never and will
never be achieved. Following Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait, no
international consensus was obtained to drive Saddam's
troops out of Kuwait. Anyone who looks at history, and
reviews the arguments that were made at the time, can
clearly see this. When the Muslims in Bosnia were
being massacred by the Serbs, no international
consensus was obtained to support the Bosnians.
Indeed, the Russians – at the time – supported
Belgrade against the Muslims. If we had focused all
our attention on convincing the Russians to change
their position, we would still be in the midst of the
Balkan crisis today, whilst massacres would still be
taking place throughout Bosnia and Herzegovina! Those who fear civil war breaking out in Syria, if
the opposition is armed, or Sunni extremists coming to
power, like US President Barack Obama or Egyptian
Foreign Minister [Mohamed Kamel Amr], are giving
Bashar al-Assad the green light to continue to pursue
his military campaign and butcher more Syrian women
and children, in the same manner as what happened
recently in Homs. They must realize that the al-Assad regime was not
overthrown by the efforts of the first Dabi mission
[Arab League monitoring delegation], nor will it be
toppled by the "second Dabi mission" which is headed
by Kofi Anna today, as described by my colleague Iyad
Abu Shackra in his own column for Asharq Al-Awsat. On the contrary, the international reluctance to
carry out clinical airstrikes against Syria, as
suggested by US Senator John McCain, only serves to
incite the Syrian revolution, as it will provoke the
Syrian revolutionaries to take the decision to respond
with violence to avenge the massacres that are being
committed by the regime. This regime has never stopped
promoting sectarian violence and inciting the fears of
Syria's minorities. The Syrians won't stop protesting no matter how
long it takes. However, the most extreme voice will
win in the end, particularly as the world has turned
its back on the tragedies being suffered by the Syrian
people. Protests started peacefully in Syria, but after a
whole year passed with conspiracies, international
procrastination, successive missions and ridiculous
Arab League solutions, the FSA and the military
dimensions of this battle have emerged. If this undervaluing of the tragedy being suffered
by the Syrian people persists, we won't be able to
blame the opposition if it turns to military and
security escalation, or even if it turns to extremist
political discourse which could go beyond the borders
of the Syrian State. In summary, it would be wrong if anyone in the
world or the region assumes that time alone is capable
of aborting the Syrian revolution. No, this revolution
will only get stronger and nastier, particularly with
the international community letting down the Syrian
people and proposing paltry solutions. We must brace ourselves for another chapter of
bloodshed, tears, and instability in Syria. Within a
few months, such missions and political solutions
might be viewed as nothing more than empty political
talk, far removed from reality. Regional and international countries can still
introduce some initiatives, but time is running out,
and we may soon be crying over spilt milk. In summary, let's forget about the Russians and the
Chinese, Obama's reluctance to take action, and the
conspiracy theories being espoused by some Arab
parties. Those who are willing to take action and who
believe in the Syrian revolution should act now:
namely Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, the UAE, Jordan
and Turkey. At the very least, those of the above who
are ready to take the initiative must do so now! Reaching a consensus is impossible. Those who are
ready should act A Saudi journalist and
expert on Islamic movements and Islamic fundamentalism
as well as Saudi affairs. Mshari is Asharq Al-Awsat's
opinion page Editor, where he also contributes a
weekly column. Has worked for the local Saudi press
occupying several posts at Al -Madina newspaper
amongst others. He has been a guest on numerous news
and current affairs programs as an expert on Islamic
extremism Comments 💬 التعليقات |