At present, after 16 months of uprising against the government by the Free Syrian Army (FSA), more than 19,000 civilians have lost their lives. A civil war has been rightly declared, both by Assad and the international community. Recently, fighting was brought in the courtyard of the capital, killing the defence minister, a close aide to Assad. Many other influential and government figures were also injured. Some say that the FSA is gaining momentum day by day and already controls the border by Turkey. This month alone, according to an activist group, more than 2,750 people were killed. Escalating violence in Syria can spark a refugee crisis for its neighbours.
The international community, except Russia and China, has widely condemned the discordant situation in the region. The joint UN-Arab league envoy, Kofi Annan and his six-point agenda have not been able to ease tensions. According to some views, the whole mission has been a failure and $7.5 million funding by the UN to the Annan mission has gone to waste. Rightly so, Annan who claimed to be a close ally of Assad could not bring in any tangible results to stop the bloodshed in Syria. To his benefit, the international mediator has indeed convened many high level meetings on the Syrian issue and contrary to the western desire, urged Iran to be a part of the negotiations.
The UN Secretary General Ban-Ki Moon, too, apart from the efforts of Annan, has tirelessly travelled and urged world leaders to stop the bloodshed in Syria. He held key talks with Chinese and Russian leadership prior to the voting in the Security Council. The Security Council still could not unanimously agree on the resolution put forward by the French, which called for military intervention against Syria. This drama in the Security Council reiterates the point that Syria is a “colossal failure”, as termed by Susan Rice, the American ambassador to the UN. Big guns of the world have failed to put pressure on the Assad Administration due to the deadlock in the Security Council. Russia and China must understand that the world will now hold them responsible. They should either help in Syria’s transition towards a more democratic state or fully support any economic sanctions put forward by the western front.
It is my opinion that Pakistan should support the policy of ‘no external influence’ backed by the Russians and the Chinese as it supports our stance in the long-run. We must not forget the perpetual American-Israeli relationship and the Iranian factor, which is involved in this whole debacle.
According to a recent article in The New York Times, we see that the United States of America has abandoned efforts for a diplomatic settlement to the Syrian conflict. American officials, through coordinated efforts with Israel and Turkey, have decided to arm the FSA and fund their operations. Intelligence support by the CIA is also on the table. Recently, FSA had sent a list of things to be procured for them by America, this ‘wish-list’ included assault rifles, explosives and other tactical equipment to aid their fight towards Assad’s regime
Surprisingly, it is not only America who is funding the FSA, but full-scale military training and operational funding is also being carried out by our friends in the Gulf countries. These Sunni-dominated countries have aligned their interests primarily for the sake of the oppressed Sunni’s in Syria, the Sunni-Shia clash is clearly in play. The Syrian ambassador to the UN has repeatedly spoken of this and has blamed Libya for providing ‘on ground training facilities’ for the FSA. He claims that these training grounds are being heavily funded by Qatar and Saudi Arabia. He also claimed in one of the General Assembly meetings that the Houla Massacre, in which 108 Syrians died last month, was actually a trap orchestrated by the FSA to defame the Syrian military.
Another important aspect to consider is the west’s trust deficit with Iran. The US clearly wants to deride the Iranians. Iran, like Russia and China, is a strong ally of Syria. The American diplomatic front was against the inclusion of Iran in the high level negotiations convened by Kofi Annan.
On the Contrary, let’s not forget that the Russian have not only been protecting Syria on the diplomatic platform but also have been regularly replenishing their military might. Russia and China have thrice vetoed any draft resolution against Syria at the United Nation. The Russian and Chinese support the Syrian people and want the Syrian people to themselves decide what is right for them but do not want to turn a blind eye on Assad.
In conclusion, a quagmire like this, could either spark a cold war or a regional mess in Syria. It would be wise for Pakistan to side with the Syrian people as far as the humanitarian aspect is concerned. However, we should stand by the policy of zero external influence in Syria. Pakistan should also support a simultaneous proposal for a transitional government leading to a stronger democratic system with equal weightage given to all ethnicities.
Published in The Express Tribune, August 2nd, 2012.
COMMENTS (22)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
I like how everyone who has gotten defensive against this article says that we can't stay mute while such atrocities happen. Well my fellow Pakistani's.. how long do you plan on staying mute about what the Taliban has been doing in our own backyard?
@ Vice Admiral (r) Mohammad Haroon
dont you know that Pakistanis are busy saving Burmese Muslims? Come back if Syrians are being killed by Buddhists (or Christians/ Jews/Hindus). Will help you then.
Those who advocate external intervention in Syria need to be careful. External intervention by whom?? USA, UK , France? Can these countries be trusted? Do you really think Syrian people will start living their dream if Asad regime is toppled by the west? Lets not fool ourselves by saying that the Syrian people will benefit from any form of external intervention.
OK if not the western countries can Saudi, Qatar and other arab states be trusted? I would err on the side of caution and say No. Everyone knows their worry is Iran and not eternal prosperity of the Syrian people.
In my view, its an open secret that these same external powers are fuelling the civil war in Syria which has cost precious lives. Asad regime cannot be blamed for snubbing outlaws whose ultimate aim is to pave way for the new world order.
Pakistan would be well served to support non intervention by external powers as any step on the contrary would be considered equallly justified course of action by these same countries when (God forbid) time comes for Baluchistan.
I think the learned Admiral has presented balanced views by placing ground facts in their relevant context and suggesting a course of action which seems strategically correct for a country like Pakistan. Great article Admiral. Keep writing as we need such intellectual discourse.
Very curious, It is OK for muslims to kill muslims or others. Pakistan should not get involved. But when buddhists kill muslims then Pakistan, China, Ummah, OhISee, UN, US and everyone else should get involved, atleast according to Pakistanis. Very very curious, indeed.
Of course external meddling in the affairs of Syria, helps not the Syrian people but the the extra regional players, who have their own long term agendas. As one of the largest Muslim state in the world, Pakistan has a responsible role to play at international fora like the United Nations and the OIC to help bring about an end to the misery of the common man in the Syrian cities, which are experiencing bloodshed on a daily basis. Currently the warring parties have so many powerful backers that they do not want to stop the fighting before they emerge as the clear winners. The internecine warfare will destabilize the entire region and the fault-lines may extend to our very borders. It is in the interest of Pakistan to create an impartial and honest lobby that can convince both parties to ceasefire and come to the negotiating table in the larger interest of their country.
Pakistan's stance on foreign intervention in Syria or elsewhere. Gee, it might come to haunt us. So we abstained on the last resolution. The article is a good exercise in obfuscation. Well done Admiral Sb! Syria will not be at peace till Bashar al Assad leaves power. The situation now is such that there may not be peace even after he leaves. An Iraq like situation or worse may develop.
Pakistan should know the policy of externally supported map change can effect it in near future as well, think about Baluchistan etc. I think the writer understands what he wrote. There is an armed rebellion going on in Syria (comparison with Burma), and population has no say in that, if Syria breaks up then Turkey will break up as well(if Assad goes there is real chance of Syria turning into new Afghanistan), as far as Saudis and Qataris, I am sure they know where they will apply for asylum, but history shows there is no permanent friends or guarantees. Before Hafiz Al Assad Syria used to be politically very unstable country, if we ever read history notes on google.
The whole thing is going as oer the script. Remember the reworking of maps of Middle east. Great Balochistan, Shia Arab State, Sunni Arab state, Islamic Sacred state etc etc. Do you think that Saudia, the most malicious dictatorship in Arab word is arming rebels in Syria to bring democracy in that country. Naturally not. Iran is the target for it dares challenge USA. The game is extremely dangerous for Pakistan as sectarianism shall flow is the muddy waters of our country. May God help us
A balanced article The situation is realy geting worse with too many stake holders, I'm afraid world's peace at great risk.God forbid!
While I don't support external meddling at all, and I don't think the West should interfere, nations like Turkey and Lebanon and Saudi Arabia, at a much closer proximity to Syria, and thus directly affected by events in Syria, should in this case intervene, considering the extreme brutality of the regime. I don't think any other government in the world has as much blood on its hands as the Assad regime in Syria (and this is only the son, remember what the father did in 1982). I pray that the massacre in Syria stops, and that the Assad regime is defeated.
II We need not go into episodal points like the Houla massacre: history will attend to it. Assad does not seem to lose concern for his self-preservation. He merely wants to save his position and to go on ruling the place as he has done for years already, with little concern for the welfare of the people. Besides, did he do anything to conciliate the various ethnic groups in the country? The Shia-Sunni dispute has been with the followers of Islam since the 7th century and is unlikely to be resolved any time soon. Besides, foreign intervention is already a fact, with countries like the US, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc. helping opposite sides in the civil war. Russia and China did not cover themselves with glory with their vetoes in the UNSC. Their persistent opposition to proposals in the UNSC has only served to prolong the suffering for the Syrian people – without bringing any advantage to even Russia and China. V. C. Bhutani, Delhi, India, 2 Aug 2012, 0917 IST
I The learned admiral has written with obvious concern for the Syrian people and has offered ideas that could help – if the powers that be took those ideas. The point here is, however, that Adm Haroon’s central recommendation of avoiding external intervention is not in order. Especially, countries like Russia and China historically have been totally opposed to accommodating even their own people, what to speak of their concern for people elsewhere. Russia and China are known to have resorted to violence against their own people on a colossal scale and both have enjoyed civil wars in their history in modern times. They can hardly be examples of good behaviour of States on the world scene. Assad has been essentially anti-people for the last 18 months. When it is seen to be a civil war situation, clearly there is much to be said on both sides. Assad has shown little concern for the good of his people. Non-intervention shall only mean prolongation of the civil war and further casualties.
So you want to support the Syrian people - but you recommend an action which only helps Assad who you acknowledge is a murdering thug like his father?
Khalid & A Caring Pakistani,
please read the following link:
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-syrian-war-of-lies-and-hypocrisy-7985012.html
Syrian people, Arab States, America, Israel and Turkey are on one side and Assad Regime, Iran, Hizb-Ullah, China and Russia are on the other side. What should we do, when our best friends are on different boats? Confuse everyone..The writer has succeeded..
Always on the right side of history, obviously Pakistanis can't bite both hands that feed them, at the same time. So it's ok for Chinese to kill muslims in their provinces,but not Burmese ...ok for a dictator to kill people , but no protest by JuD types
And be a mute spectator while thousands are killed? Also raise hue and cry over Burma with threats of war when far less number of people are casualties there. What double standards!!
Pakistan should better stay out of any area of conflict as it already has enough on its plate. China, Russia, or other major major powers are looking from the perspective of their strategic interests. Also do you think that someone will care what side Pakistan is on, rather will see it through suspicious eyes given our pangabazzi (meddling) in the region. Admiral Sahib may also note that Pakistan is a client/dependent state and would never dare to stand to Saudi Maharajahs what to say any western power. The world politics is no different from the politics of a Punjabi village where Chaudries call the shot and artisans without any hesitation say "Jee Chaudhari Jee."
Dear Sir,
I respectfully disagree. Pakistan holds a seat at the security council and needs to voice its opinion. What is happening is Syria is deplorable for the entire Muslim world. A dictator is killing his fellow countrymen only to continue his regime. Would we want something like that in Pakistan? If Zardari decides to take full control of Pakistan for the next 40 years and starts killing innocent people for the sake of staying in power. I think every Pakistani would be on the street if Zardari even decided to stay for another 5 year term, far is 4 decades!!! In a situation like that all Pakistani's would want a solution based on foreign intervention in order to protect themselves.
Syrians deserve the right to choose and Assad needs to leave. Pakistan as a member of the global community should push China to supporting at least condemning Syria and taking some action against Al Assad.
Lets not suggests options that we would not prefer for ourselves!!
An article full of contradictions. How do you side with the Syrian people while at the same time keeping mum about the atrocities of the Assad Regime? The author is an member of the same competent establishment who have decided our foreign policy forever, the fruits of which we are seeing now.