A Western military strike in Syria would create more problems not only in Syria but in the region.
LAHORE: Noam Chomsky, famed academic and anti-war activist, has recently written that any US-led attack on Syria without the permission of the UN would be a war crime, regardless of approval from the US Congress. It seems that the US is unwilling to learn from so many unsuccessful wars in Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, etc. and is set to take limited action against President Bashar al-Assad’s regime. Protests against his government first broke out in March 2011. Similar to other Arab Spring movements, they peacefully demanded removal of an autocratic ruler and greater freedoms. Here, I would like to say that leading economically sound countries have decided and voiced that this time, they don’t want to be part of any military intervention against Syria along with the US.
If we look at continental Europe, we see that most of it doesn’t want to be a part of any military intervention in Syria, except France. The failure to agree on a course of action among key European countries, and between Europe and the US, underlines the degree to which opinion is divided on intervention and poses questions about the potential for future cooperation in the contentious area of foreign and security policy.
America’s main backer in Europe on the issue of Syria is France. Insisting that the rejection of the UK government’s position supporting strikes in Syria, in a recent House of Commons vote, would have no effect on France, the country’s president said that France “will be part of it”. This follows a recent pattern of French interventionism, including in Libya and Mali.
The difference between war against Iraq and Syria is that in 2003, Europe was united and committed to take a part in the war against Saddam Hussein’s regime. Now, the situation is quite different. Most European leaders are determined not to take part in any attack on Syria because they believe that there is no credible evidence to suggest that the Assad regime used chemical weapons against its own people. Italy’s foreign minister has said on several occasions that Italy would only take a part in limited action if authorised by the UN Security Council. The German stance is similar to Italy’s — Chancellor Angela Merkel is facing reelection and has been cautious in expressing any support for military action against Syria. While there may be broad agreement that the use of chemical weapons is unacceptable, common ground on taking action in Syria is difficult to find.
A Western military strike in Syria would create more problems not only in Syria but in the region and could lead to further bloodshed. America and its European allies have condemned President Assad without giving any concrete evidence that chemical weapons have been used.
Sarmad Ali
Published in The Express Tribune, September 8th, 2013.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
