Monday, 16 September 2013

Why is the UN Security Council divided over Syria?

Life of world peace, in the last few days is dwindling in the wake of Syria’s alleged chemical weapon attack killing more than 1,400 people (rebels), according to US reports. World’s policeman – United States along with his allies, mainly France & UK is trying to cure the ailing ‘peace process’, currently admitted in an Intensive care unit with its ECG graph showing little signs of relief. It is no rocket science to understand why the CIA has been consistently helping the rebel groups (militarily & economically) to dominate the Syrian regime of Bashar Al Assad as this policeman supports democracy (as proclaimed by it) & most importantly to pluck out the communist backed Russia and China’s rising power & support in the Middle East. US and friends (mainly UK & France) are backing rebels to maintain the support and domination of Western allies in the Middle Eastern region because of the power struggles going on in this region like in Egypt.
On the other hand, Russia, once a strong contender of being a ‘World Hegemon’ in the past few decades, is helping the Syrian regime (militarily & economically) to mark its presence and rise in the world’s political classes yet again. Russia is backed by China, another communist which has overthrown many challenges of democratic rule politically or militarily (not to forget the Tianamen Square incident of 1989). China, considered to be – Number 2 in the world in the context of military and economic power wants to attract the Middle Eastern countries towards the East side, particularly to the communist side. Both the Eastern superpowers, Russia and China are well versed with the fact that the current power struggles in the Middle East region is the best time to inject communism in these countries which are struggling hard against their rulers. Therefore by supporting the rulers, these two superpowers are white-washing the long seen dream of democracy by the people of Middle East.
The situation is somewhat like the “Cold War Era” of 1961 after the Cuban Missile crisis shocked the United States and marked the presence of another superpower that was if not equal, then at least not lower than US in any form. Syrian ruler Assad has nothing personal to do with the communist powers or Western powers nor these two communist powers and Western powers have any personal interest in the lives of Syria and its people, the Syrian crisis is just a medium for all these UN Security Council Member countries, divided in two groups to prove that who is the real hegemon in the world politics.
In the second week of September it was vague that US (and friends) are going to strike Syria, irrespective of the outcome of G-20 meetings in the St. Petersburg in Russia. Developing but ailing economies (from the current global slowdown) like India & Brazil opposed strike on Syria for economic reasons – currency volatility due to hike in crude oil prices. This gave an edge to Communist countries over Western powers to give up the idea of striking Syria. But Western team led by Barack Obama was adamant in their decision. On one side, Barack Obama was struggling hard to gather Congress’s support on the decision, then on the other side, David Cameron was seen having talks with Ed Miliband of Labour Party to gather support in British Parliament. Francois Hollande too was seen seeking support from other European allies over the decision.
In an ad hoc manner, UN Security Council meet was called by British PM David Cameron to talk on the resolution (forwarded by Britain) to attack Syria, well knowingly that Russia and China will veto against the resolution. Disappointed by the fall of its resolution, Western powers decided to go against the UN Security Council to bring ‘peace’ in the region by punishing Assad regime with a limited ‘air strike’ on the land of Syria. The feeling to strike Syria was so strong that Western powers didn’t even try to wait for the UN inspector’s report on the chemical weapon attack in the region. In this hurry, Russia too got in quick mode to announce that military strike against Syria may halt the peace process and Russia will respond too in order to bring peace in the region. Giving not much attention to the Russian claim, Western alliance was in the midst of persuading their people to go for a limited strike against Syria ( which according to surveys, people of these countries oppose) and come out as the ‘Messiahs of World Peace’, with the use of force.
But suddenly Russia came out with a universally acceptable plan to ask Syria to surrender its chemical weapons to the International community. In response to Russian proposal, US President Barack Obama came out in the public on 10th September and declared that he will put the Congressional vote on hold if the middle way is accepted unconditionally by the Assad regime. Obama also clarified and tried to persuade its citizen in his old traditional way of diplomatically and emotionally attracting public support (seen in his Presidential campaigns) and justified his decision to attack Syria and promised his citizens that he won’t let any American boot to land in Syria and the situation will not be as worse as in Iraq and Afghanistan. Several meetings were held between US Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Geneva, Switzerland to find a mid way and then after a lot of negotiations, both the representatives agreed on 14th September to ask Assad to submit a comprehensive list of its chemical weapons within a week to the International community and by the middle of 2014, the weapons will be destructed. Assad is also asked to allow UN Inspectors to verify the chemical weapons list by this November.

Is this the end of Syrian crisis? Will these two groups come face to face again? Is everything settled now? Or are we marching towards a third world war (not exaggerating), or atleast another Cold War

No comments:

Post a Comment