‘We protest with all our power against the sham, the hypocritical sham, that
[the nonintervention policy] now appears to be.” – Philip Noel-Baker, House of
Commons, October 29, 1936.
Spain, 1936. An army revolt against the
democratically elected government sets off a civil war. On one side are the
Fascists, led by General Francisco Franco. On the other side is a coalition of
democrats both socialist and liberal; communal nationalists; anarchists,
Communists and independent Marxists. The Western democracies declare an embargo:
no arms to be sold to the Loyalist side. But Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy help
the rebels, while Stalin’s USSR helps the Communists, increasing their power
within the Loyalist coalition. In the end, the Fascists win and rule Spain for
decades.
Syria, 2012. The people revolt against the dictatorship, setting
off a civil war. On one side is the anti-American, repressive Syrian regime that
itself became a champion of revolutionary Islamism; its ally, Iran; and
Hezbollah. On the other side is a coalition of democrats, communal nationalists,
and Islamists. The Western democracies declare an embargo: no arms to be sold to
the rebels. But Shia Islamist Iran and Russia help the regime, while Turkey and
the Muslim Brotherhood help the Islamists, increasing their power within the
rebel coalition. In the end, either the regime wins or the Islamist component
among the rebels is more likely to win.
Already, 10,000 civilians have
died.
This is why UN Ambassador Susan Rice is speaking nonsense when she
says: “Our view has been that the best way to resolve this is not by
intensifying the militarization, not by providing further arms into what is
already a hot conflict – but to try to resolve it through non-military means,
through a diplomatic and political process.”
IT’S ALREADY a fratricidal
war. To decry militarization when your enemies are rushing in arms and while
there can be no diplomatic solution between two sides engaged in a battle to the
death is absurdly hypocritical. Rice continues: “For this to become a proxy war
with countries all over the region and beyond funneling weapons in there is
basically conceding a massive fire burning in that region. For those who are
advocating arming the opposition, they really ought to consider the consequences
of that approach and also to ask, frankly, who are they arming inside of the
Syrian opposition.”
It is already a proxy war, but the only ones helping
their proxies are America’s enemies, and while it is true that there are such
forces also among the rebels – a point that never bothered the Obama
administration over Libya – a decent policy should be able to ensure that the
arms don’t go to the Brotherhood and Salafists but to units commanded by
officers who have defected from the army; Kurdish and Druse communal
nationalists; and moderates.
IN SEVERAL respects, the Syrian civil war is
the Spanish Civil War of our time. It is an exhibition match between two
ideological rivals – Shia Islamism and Sunni Islamism – that cannot co-exist. It
is a testing ground for the conflicts to come. Yet it is also not a simple
battle of good against evil. The Syrian regime is certainly evil, but the rebels
are a mixed bag. The best elements deserve the outside world’s
support.
Yet the democratic outside world is, for all practical purposes,
standing passive.
The Iranian regime is helping one side with huge
amounts of money and arms, as Nazi Germany did for the Franco forces; the
Turkish regime and the Saudis are helping the other side a bit, but giving
disproportionate assistance to the Muslim Brotherhood, like the USSR gave to the
Communists in Spain. Indeed, US policy is aiding the Brotherhood,
too.
Nobody is helping the moderate, pro-democracy people; the Druse and
Kurdish communal nationalists; and the technocratic military officers who have
put their lives on the line to fight the dictatorship.
Why stand and
watch while the Iranian- Syrian bloc, determined to destabilize the region and
destroy US interests, crushes those who want democracy? Why stand and watch (and
even help!) while the Muslim Brotherhood and Turkey, determined to foment
Islamist revolution and destroy US interests, seize control of the opposition
and seek to impose a new and equally ferocious dictatorship on Syria? Yes,
despite all the smug “pro-democracy” rhetoric coming out of the Obama
administration and others, nobody is helping the moderates who are doomed either
to being crushed by the repressive regime or being overwhelmed by the
totalitarians on their own side. This is a tragedy but it is a tragedy in which
passivity is as powerful a force as is evil. That the Obama administration is
mouthing platitudes about human rights and supporting democracy makes the
situation altogether more sickening.
When the dictatorship defeats the
opposition and hundreds of people are massacred or, albeit less likely but
possible, if the Islamists turn Syria into another totalitarian regime in an
alliance to destroy Western interests in the region, let’s have no doubt who is
also responsible.
Homework assignment for readers: Rice said that we knew
far more about the opposition in Libya – when the US government and NATO decided
to put it into power by force – than we do about the opposition in Syria.
Discuss.
The writer is the director of Global Research in International
Affairs (GLORIA) Center. He also publishes the Rubin Report blog
http://rubinreports.blogspot.com/
|