20 June 2013
(Reposted
April 7, 2017)
After promising
improved relations with Russia and avoiding military involvement in Syria,
the new Trump Administration has joined its predecessors in launching
additional violence on the Middle East; bombing targets in Syria,
irrespective of the consequences for improving relations with Russia and
reducing the pain and suffering of the Syrian people. Since the original post
below, it is estimated, some eleven million Syrians have been forced to
migrate from their homes, six million of whom have desperately fled to other
countries in the region, European countries, and even the United States
(although former Indiana Governor Mike Pence, tried to restrict the
settlement of Syrian refugees in his home state). The United States bombing
of an airfield in Syria is designed, the Administration said, to send a
message to the Syrian government that its own bombing of Syrian targets
allegedly using chemical weapons is unacceptable. Members of the
international community might ask what consequences the United States should
suffer for its own bombings two weeks ago, with over 200 deaths of innocent
civilians, of targets in West Mosul, Iraq.
The only rational
United States policy to reduce the extraordinary pain and suffering in the Middle
East is to withdrew military forces and to work with others, even competitors
such as Russia, Iran, and Syria, to stop the violence against the Syrian
people. However, there is no evidence now that the new administration will do
anything other than has been done before; bombings, drone strikes, funding
competing military factions in the civil war, sending U.S. troops, all which promote
more death and destruction. (HT. April 7, 2017)
**********************************************************************
|
One more time: Waist
deep in the Big Muddy
June 20, 2013
The case is clear
that increasing the United States' military involvement in Syria has negative
consequences for the Middle East, international relations, the inspiration of
Arab Spring, American politics, and the people of Syria.
In 2011 the grassroots revolts that spread all across the Middle East caught the traditional imperial powers in the region -- the United States, Great Britain, and France -- by surprise. Even more so, the Middle East theocracies and dictatorships -- Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Egypt, Bahrain, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, and others -- were threatened by those young people, workers, unemployed, and women, who took to the streets motivated by the vision of another world.
The United States watched the street protests hoping against hope that the authoritarian regimes in Tunisia and Egypt would weather the storm. The Obama administration did not move publicly to aid these regimes to crush the protest but withheld its endorsement of the grassroots democracy movement.
The idea of popular revolt spread to places all across the globe including Madison, Wisconsin; Santiago, Chile; Athens, Greece; Madrid, Spain; and Quebec, Canada. The Occupy Movement in the United States expanded.
Globally, movements for a 21st century democratization seemed to be replicating 1968.
In this historic context, the imperial powers needed to transform the Middle East narrative from demands for jobs, worker rights, women’s rights, and democratization, to the more traditional religious and ethnic conflict model of Middle East politics.
The United States organized a United Nations/NATO coalition to intervene to encourage rebellion in Libya coupled with a game-changing air war against the Libyan military. The result was the overthrow of the government of Muammar Gaddafi and its replacement by a quarrelsome ungovernable regime rife with ethnic strife.
The UN/NATO war on Libya was billed as the next phase of Arab Spring, while actually it imposed religious and ethnic conflict on a relatively stable but authoritarian regime.
The anger over the U.S. encouragement and military intervention in the Libyan civil war was reflected in the killings by Libyan terrorists of CIA operatives in Benghazi, Libya, in September 2012. What intervention in Libya did was to destabilize that society and eliminate its former dictator who was opposed to the growing U.S. military expansion in North Africa.
Most important, it took off the front pages and the hearts and minds of youth, the poor, women, and trade unionists the hope of mass movements to bring about democratic change in the region.
U.S. covert and military intervention has shifted now from Libya to Syria. Mobilization against the Bashar al-Assad dictatorship in Syria was applauded by the United States. As the protest escalated into civil war in that country with contestants including secular and religious groups fighting against Assad’s army, the United States, Sunni countries of the Arab League, and NATO countries escalated their support to the rebels.
Another Libya-style UN/NATO military operation was thwarted by strong opposition from Russia and China and the threat of growing military support for the Syrian regime by Iran.
Part of the ongoing story of Syria is the following:
The United States launched its diplomatic involvement in the
Syrian civil war by insisting that Bashar al-Assad must step down. This
precluded any possibility of a diplomatic settlement of the civil war and the
eventual dismantling of the Assad regime. Most important, the United States'
non-negotiable demand made diplomatic collaboration between the United States
and Russia all but impossible.
Support for various rebel factions, diplomatic and
presumably covert, has encouraged the escalation of opposition violence which
has been matched by state violence.
Rebel factions, ironically, have included groups with
profiles that resemble the terrorists who were responsible for the 9/11 murders
in the United States and terrorist attacks on various targets in the Middle
East and Afghanistan.
Violence and political instability have begun to spread to
Lebanon, Turkey, and Jordan, and have drawn Israel and Iran closer into
regional war.
As the Syrian civil war has escalated it has become a
“proxy” war between the United States and Russia and Sunni and Shia Muslims.
In the United States, the civil war in Syria has rekindled
the war factions. These include the “neoconservatives” who were responsible for
the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Using 9/11 and lies about weapons of mass
destruction, the neoconservatives influenced the Bush administration to pursue
their agenda to use United States power to transform the globe in its
interests.
The neoconservatives, advocates of United States military
intervention in Syria, are now joined by the “humanitarian interventionists”
who in the Clinton Administration supported bombing campaigns in Iraq, Serbia,
and Bosnia and live by the ideology that the United States must use its
military power to promote human rights around the world.
It is important to note that recent polling data suggests that only a small percentage of the American people, about 20 percent, give any support to United States involvement in Syria. Most Americans are suffering from declining jobs, income, and social safety nets, and reject the war economy and militarism that has characterized the U.S. role in the world since 1945.
It is important to note that recent polling data suggests that only a small percentage of the American people, about 20 percent, give any support to United States involvement in Syria. Most Americans are suffering from declining jobs, income, and social safety nets, and reject the war economy and militarism that has characterized the U.S. role in the world since 1945.
The escalation of the civil war, the growing military role
of the United States, Russia, Iran, Turkey, NATO, Hezbollah from Lebanon, and
Israel has led to nearly 100,000 Syrian deaths and more than a million
refugees. As in most international wars, innocent people suffer and die as
military decisions are made in government capitals.
The case is clear that increasing the United States'
military involvement in Syria has negative consequences for the Middle East,
international relations, the inspiration of Arab Spring, American politics, and
the people of Syria.
The hope for a more just and peaceful future requires support for the resumption of the spirit and vision of the original Arab Spring that began in Tunisia and Egypt and spread all across the globe. Otherwise the United States will once again be “waist deep in the big muddy” as in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan.
The hope for a more just and peaceful future requires support for the resumption of the spirit and vision of the original Arab Spring that began in Tunisia and Egypt and spread all across the globe. Otherwise the United States will once again be “waist deep in the big muddy” as in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan.