No reconciliation with the butcher of Damascus
07/18/2012 23:07
Do they really think in their heart of hearts that a political solution
is possible with Assad?
Syrian President Bashar Assad Photo: Sana / Reuters
I must express my profound outrage regarding the behavior of the Western powers,
Turkey, the Arab League and Kofi Annan, all of whom are still debating the
likelihood of finding a political solution to end the merciless butchering of
the Syrian people by the Assad regime.
Do they really think in their
heart of hearts that a political solution is possible given the fact that Assad
has defied all previous resolutions while his killing machine continues to erase
one Syrian town after another? How ironic it is that the countries that preach
the gospel of human rights have resorted to self-imposed paralysis while
justifying it by the presumed lack of legitimacy of intervention.
WHAT
LEGITIMACY is needed to intervene when thousands of men, women and children are
massacred each month? When does hypocrisy end when politics trump moral
obligation, and when great powers surrender their most precious values to the
devil? I understand the pitfalls and the potentially regional repercussions
resulting even from a carefully-planned military intervention. But this must be
weighed not only against the systematic butchering of the Syrian people but also
against the credibility and the standing of these powers in the eyes of those
nations that look up to United States or NATO not to tolerate this kind of
travesty, which transcends the cruelest human conduct imagined.
What do
other despots learn from the Syrian experience and why should they behave any
differently toward their own people when they can do so with immunity? For how
much longer can those countries that can actually do something to stop the
carnage wait? When is enough, enough? How many more Syrians must be killed in
cold blood for the consciousness of the international community to be awakened
to action? The most recent massacre, estimated to be between 120 and 200 people
in the village of Tremseh near the city of Hama, attests not only to Assad’s
utter ruthlessness but also to his fear that he is about to lose his grip on
power.
Although Assad has moved some of his chemical weapons either to
protect them from falling into the hands of the rebels or as a last-ditch effort
to use them against the rebels to save his regime, it will be suicidal as he
will be crossing a red line that invites immediate Western military
intervention.
At the time of this writing, the United Nations Security
Council will be at it again trying to pass yet another useless and insulting
resolution designed to end the conflict peacefully. One would think that by now
the United States and NATO members have learned their lessons from previous
resolutions that have only allowed Assad to continue the unabated slaughter of
his people.
THE FIRST draft resolution, sponsored by Russia, calls for
extending the UN observer mission by an additional three months and supports a
more political mission by cutting back the number of military observers. In
addition, Russia urges both sides to observe a cease-fire, calls for the full
implementation of the Annan Plan, and forcefully rejects a Chapter VII mandate
which allows for the use of economic and diplomatic sanctions in any and all
forms up to, but not including, military force.
This resolution is no
different from the Annan plan that was dead on arrival and ignored from day one,
forcing the UN observers to suspend their mission in the wake of the continuing
killings and indiscriminate destruction.
The three Western powers (the
US, Britain and France) drafted a more forceful resolution that would give Assad
10 days to comply with the full implementation of the Annan plan by first
withdrawing troops from populated areas. Should he fail to do so, Syria would
face diplomatic and economic punishment in addition to the threat of military
force under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. Any effort to agree on a compromise
between the two resolutions, if successful at all, will end once up again being
a toothless resolution that will only give Assad license to continue his
massacres without any fear of punishment or serious threats to his
regime.
The Western powers might still offer their resolution for a vote
through the UNSC even though they expect Russia to exercise its veto power. The
advantage they would reap from such an exercise is to paint Russia as a
complicit party to the abhorrent developments in Syria, which are sliding the
state quickly toward full-fledged civil war, which the Red Cross has already
characterized the bloodshed as. Although Russia’s position would be greatly
undermined in the eyes of Arab states, the mass killing would
continue.
The outcry of the Syrian people has been heard time and time
again but the international community remains paralyzed, engaged in wishful
thinking that somehow the Assad regime will heed their call. This obviously will
not happen and now Western powers, along with Turkey, must muster the courage
and decide on a course of action that will bring an end to a regime that has
long since lost any remaining vestiges of humanity. Assad and his cronies must
go. Under no circumstances can there be any reconciliation between the butcher
of Damascus and the international community or Syria’s people.
The time
has come for a coordinated military intervention, with or without Russian
consent. A safe haven must be established in the north and south of the country,
spearheaded by Turkey with the support of NATO. A no-fly zone should go into
effect immediately, medical, financial and military aid should be provided to
the opposition forces, and selected Syrian military targets should be
bombed.
Simultaneously, a clear message should be sent to Assad that the
bombing will escalate until he steps down from power. The West, along with the
Arab League, should offer him and the hundreds of culprits from his military,
police and intelligence services safe passage to a third country provided he
makes the decision to leave within two weeks and on the condition that he
immediately stops the onslaught against his people. In so doing the US, unlike
Russia, could increase its leverage with the Syrians once Assad is
deposed.
THE CONCERN that such a military intervention may plunge the
Middle East into regional conflict is baseless.
The last thing that Assad
would venture to do is challenge Turkey and its NATO allies. Moreover, to draw
Israel into the conflict would invite counterattacks that could obliterate his
power base.
Iran, which is under tremendous international pressure
because of its defiance of the international community in connection with its
nuclear program, will think twice before it directly interferes, fearing that
this may provide the United States or Israel the pretext to attack its nuclear
installations. Hezbollah will seek to preserve its position and is unlikely to
come to Assad’s aid, knowing full well that the Assad regime has run its
course.
FINALLY, RUSSIA can do nothing to prevent Western and Turkish
interference with the support of the Arab League other than condemning their
actions.
Moreover, Russia knows that for all intents and purposes the
Assad regime is finished. It is not unlikely that if Russia also knows of the
inevitable Western military intervention, it may decide to make a deal with the
West and Turkey with the blessing of the Arab League and the Syrian opposition
(as was recently discussed between the opposition and Russia) to ensure its
strategic interests in the region and sacrifice the Assad regime in
return.
As I have stated time and again, such a course of action will
provide the West a momentous opportunity to extract Syria from Iran’s belly,
which might force Iran to rethink its regional strategy as well as its nuclear
ambition.
Time is running out. The longer Western powers wait, the more
Syrians will die on the altar of international ineptitude.
There are no
excuses left for the West to hide behind its contrived political calculations
and lose what is left of its moral standing.
The writer is a professor of
international relations at the Center for Global Affairs at NYU. He teaches
courses on international negotiation and Middle Eastern studies.
alon@alonben-meir.com