OPINION_ Syria’s cover for murder

Syria’s cover for murder
By Editorial Board, Saturday, March 31, 10:00 AM
The Washington Post

IT’S NOW BEEN 10 days since the U.N. Security Council endorsed a six-point plan for Syria created by former secretary general Kofi Annan, and the Obama administration’s ambassador described it as “the best way to put an end to the violence, facilitate much-needed humanitarian assistance and advance a Syrian-led political transition.” During that time, according to the London-based Strategic Research and Communication Centre, 624 more Syrians have been reported killed, including 58 women and 45 children.

The Annan plan calls for Syrian troops, tanks and artillery to withdraw from cities and towns. But according to multiple independent reports, those troops attacked and shelled the cities of Homs, Hama, Saraqeb, Daraa and Nawa this week. On Friday, three days after Mr. Annan announced that his plan had been accepted by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, regime forces opened fire on protesters in the eastern town of Quriya, killing at least eight.

There have been no humanitarian deliveries to these embattled cities; no two-hour daily “humanitarian pause,” as Mr. Annan called for; no release of detainees, who number more than 200,000. If the death toll and extent of fighting remain uncertain — the numbers we cite are based on reports from opposition sources — that’s because the Annan plan’s provision for freedom of movement for journalists, like every other one of its six points, has been ignored by the regime.

These results were completely predictable at the time the Security Council adopted the plan with President Obama’s support. They have more than proved what we, among many others, pointed out at the time: that the Annan plan would merely provide cover for Mr. Assad to go on killing his own people. Yet the Obama administration continues to bet on the initiative, while rejecting other options — such as the creation of a safe zone in Syria. “We want to see, and support very much, the efforts of Kofi Annan and give him the time and diplomatic space that he needs to make this work,” State Department spokesman Mark Toner said Thursday.

How much time? How many more dead? Mr. Annan’s spokesman in Geneva said Friday that “the deadline is now. We expect [Assad] to implement this plan immediately.” Those words will merely make Mr. Annan look more feckless. Mr. Assad will never implement the plan. Were he to do so, his regime would quickly collapse — and the dictator and his family long ago made clear that they have no intention of surrendering.

Obama administration officials describe the Annan plan as a tool that could facilitate the removal of Mr. Assad without triggering a civil war. But civil war — albeit a one-sided one — has been underway in Syria for months already. And the Annan plan does not provide for Mr. Assad to step down. On the contrary: The plan’s chief proponent, Russia, sees it as the means to keep the regime in power.

The Obama administration’s de facto choice to tolerate the survival of a regime that is Iran’s chief ally in the Middle East and the sponsor of Hamas and Hezbollah might have many motivations. But neither the will to prevent mass murder nor the pursuit of U.S. strategic interests could be among them.

Read more on Syria from PostOpinions

_ Richard Cohen: A need to lead on Syria

_ Jackson Diehl: The U.S. should help Syria

_ David Ignatius: A soft landing in Syria

_ Jennifer Rubin: Syria slaughter

_ The Post’s View: How to save Syria

***

Washington Post Editorials

Editorials represent the views of The Washington Post as an institution, as determined through debate among members of the editorial board. News reporters and editors never contribute to editorial board discussions, and editorial board members don’t have any role in news coverage.

***
21 Comments


tidelandermdva wrote:
3:53 PM UTC+1100
Please specify how many American deaths you think this is worth



Carloos wrote:
2:07 PM UTC+1100
The Post's View is absolutely right .. the reason that President Obama has not stopped the mass murder is his fear of this years election .. he is acting like a coward .. not like the leader of the home of the brave .. it is disgusting .. after 380 days the State Dept says it is depending on Mr. Assad to stop shooting .. the Gulf States and Turkey are being told by the State Dept to let the murder continue ... 380 days is not enough for Mr. Obama ..

Turkey's Mr. Davutoglu stressed that the signs were "not promising." He said the international community should be vigilant to the possibility that President Assad would use the plan "as an initiative which would allow him to kill his own people."

Listen to John McCain in the last half of this interview .. http://www.mediaite.com/tv/mccain-disappointed-in-...



MarkThomason wrote:
2:03 PM UTC+1100
This editorial also covers for murder, but in its case it is the Saudi Wahhabist opposition. That opposition also will not comply, and makes no mystery of that, just refuses to talk. The editorial supposes that the Syrian government will just shrug and walk away, leaving its country in the control of the Taliban.

40% of Syria is minorities, and they are rightly terrified of the rigid Sunni Taliban approach. The editorial too should consider to whom it would give power. This is cover for murder, following Libya style chaos.



jy151310 wrote:
1:43 PM UTC+1100
The UN covers for murder only when they aren't committing it themselves


moebius22 wrote:
1:22 PM UTC+1100
The Obama administration’s de facto choice to tolerate the survival of a regime that is Iran’s chief ally in the Middle East and the sponsor of Hamas and Hezbollah might have many motivations. But neither the will to prevent mass murder nor the pursuit of U.S. strategic interests could be among them.
++++++++++++++

How does the the Wapo Editorial Board know that tolerating Assad is not in the U.S. strategic interests? We had a previous Administration that thought opposing the Hussein government was in U.S. interests and look how that played itself out.



Bud0 wrote:
1:06 PM UTC+1100
"UN covers for murder." That's just the sort of cheapshot the world has come to expect from the Washington foreign policy establishment, whose real gripe with the UN is that they see its vision of a community of nations as a barrier to America asserting its true "greatness".

What is America's alternative? Invasion? Think that will save lives? But of course even the Washington hawks don't advocate invasion. So they've got nothing. The Post has nothing. And yes, I've just read "The Post’s View: How to save Syria". The Post has nothing.

The number of active wars, and the number of people killed by war, has diminished sharply in every decade since the UN's foundation. That's the achievement of collective security. The UN has also ended civil wars, arranged painful partitions, and with a few glaring exceptions, enforced the rule that no nation shall win land by military conquest. The UN has even eradicated diseases that killed millions. What has the US achieved? They used to boast about winning the Cold War but according to Mitt Romney, no, the Cold War is still on.

The US alternative to collective security - unilateral military diktat - was tested in Iraq with utterly disastrous results. Syria will have to kill 50 times as many people as it has so far to match that bloody fiasco. Given the Post's role in pushing that catastrophic blunder, I wonder if they can really look down on bloodsoaked Assad from such a great moral height



Bud0 responds:
1:10 PM UTC+1100
They certainly have no business looking down on the UN -- the organisation that actually destroyed Iraq's WMD.



Carloos responds:
2:12 PM UTC+1100
What is America's alternative? Budo asked .. Please listen to the last half of this interview link ..

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/mccain-disappointed-in-...

John McCain knows ..


npsilver wrote:
12:59 PM UTC+1100
Annan was the wrong man to send on this mission of life saving. He stood idly by not more than ten air miles from where thousands of Hutu's and Tutsi' slaughtered each other in Rawanda a decade ago. Next time find a pro who isn't looking for a free paid vacation covered by UN (really US!) monies.



MilesKeogh wrote:
12:48 PM UTC+1100
Obama is not doing much either.Another example of him being in over his head.



Nissl wrote:
12:41 PM UTC+1100
Remind me why getting deeply involved in a sectarian civil war is in our strategic interest, again?



Shubi wrote:
11:57 AM UTC+1100
I'm not sure why US mainstream media still not showing both sides of the coin.
Per German news: Der Spiegel this is the link: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,8... Rebels admitting: "If we catch a Sunni spying, or if a citizen betrays the revolution, we make it quick," says the fighter. According to Abu Rami, Hussein's burial brigade has put between 200 and 250 traitors to death since the beginning of the uprising.

If this happening in the US I would definitely want our army to protect us. It's basically anyone doesn't want to be part of the revolution is assassinated and our government support these people?? It's another form of Al-Qaeda.



rbe1 wrote:
11:22 AM UTC+1100
Before you sign on to yet another intervention, perhaps you ought to more thoroughly acquaint yourselves with just who these freedom-loving, paragons of virtue are who are seeking to overthrow the current government.



______ Stevedoro responds:
11:32 AM UTC+1100
The suggestion was not to overtly support the Opposition, but to provide safe zones for the thousands of refugees and humanitarian assistance. That seems to be more than even the Administration and the Arabe league can muster at this point



______ rbe1 responds:
12:12 PM UTC+1100
Well the sticking point is that Assad insisted that the outside military aid be halted before he stopped fighting the rebels, and from everything I've read so far, elements from the Saudi government continue to support the rebels, so it's a little complicated.
Because I have become suspicious of everything western governments are saying, I'm willing to bet that the rebel account of what's going on there is not entirely on the up and up. The other problem is that the rebel position has been no talks until Assad leaves, which sort of makes the whole peace talk thing a joke, sort of like our insistence that Iran stop their program before we discuss whether they should stop their program. But of course, might always makes right.



Stevedoro wrote:
10:58 AM UTC+1100
A cogent and well written editorial. The Administration really has not Mideast Policy and it is doubtful it ever really will. The President has either lead from behind and as witenessed in this case, not at all while the slaughter continues in the face of a useless UN effort. Once again, Mr. Annan has groveled in front of a laughing Syrian Mafia. Shame on our President who apparently puts his reelection in front of this terrible humanitarian crisis.


Carloos responds:
2:17 PM UTC+1100
You have it absolutely right Stevedoro ..

.. pls here the last half of this video .. http://www.mediaite.com/tv/mccain-disappointed-in-...



blueskiestravel wrote:
10:52 AM UTC+1100
May peace prevails, but dictators do not listen to the people. I wish Mr. Bashar leaves Syria to a destination where some government can give him political asylum and leave Syria for Syrians. Syrian leader is responsible for 10's of thousand of killings a shameless massacre of the innocent



______ jleibund1 responds:
1:01 PM UTC+1100
Just like a feckless UN, diplomacy, pacifism, or a sitting US President driven only by election considerations, your "wishing Bashar" to leave won't succeed either.



______ blueskiestravel responds:
1:58 PM UTC+1100
Your frustration while sitting on a chair is not a solution either, Remember we are civilians and only thing in our controls is wishing well and hoping the best. Got it?



______ wireliner responds:
4:34 PM UTC+1100
Does the Washington Post think that no one else in the world notices the movements in foreign policy? Surely you must be kidding.

Americans aren't in favor of empire. Many studies show that, many ways. Does the WP think it can change that?

Why does the Washington Post continue to try to foist this nonsense upon us?

____________

What do you think ?

Các anh chị nghĩ thế nào, có ý kiến- phê bình gì qua bài viết "Syria’s cover for murder" và 21 ý kiến- phê bình từ "21 Comments" của đọc giả ?



Chân thành cám ơn Quý Anh Chị ghé thăm "conbenho Nguyễn Hoài Trang Blog"
Xin được lắng nghe ý kiến chia sẻ của Quý Anh Chị trực tiếp tại Diễn Đàn Paltalk: 1Latdo Tapdoan Vietgian CSVN Phanquoc Bannuoc .
Kính chúc Sức Khỏe Quý Anh Chị .


conbenho
Tiểu Muội quantu
Nguyễn Hoài Trang
31032012
___________
CSVN là TỘI ÁC
Bao che, dung dưỡng TỘI ÁC là đồng lõa với TỘI ÁC