By Charles Crawford
Last updated: March 27th, 2012
114 Comments
Syria in flames: shall we just leave them to it?
The Good (notably former UN secretary general Kofi Annan) and the Not Quite Great (former Australian Foreign Minister Gareth Evans) give us their high-profile thoughts on the grim situation in Syria.
Mr Annan is on a world tour to drum up support for a new peace plan. Here he is in Moscow:
Annan said it will be up to the Syrians themselves to decide if Assad should step down. "It may in the end come to that, but it's not up to me, it's up to the Syrians," said Annan, a former UN secretary-general. "Our effort is to help the Syrians come to the table and find the way out of all of this."
It’s safe to assume that the tried and proven way of the "Syrians deciding for themselves" what they want – namely through free and fair elections – is not what is envisaged here. This, of course, is the best the "international community" can come up with, given the strenuous Russian and Chinese opposition to anything which looks like taking sides against the Syrian regime.
Over at Project Syndicate, Gareth Evans gives us a similar position wrapped in ingenious obfuscations about the "responsibility to protect" under international law. This idea of the "responsibility to protect" (or R2P as it is wittily known) has considerable moral force. These days we think it right to intervene vigorously to stop our neighbour flogging his spouse or his dog. Surely it must be even more right to intervene vigorously to stop our international neighbours committing mass murder?
Only up to a point. As Gareth Evans points out, various principles have emerged to define what may or may not be legal or acceptable in such circumstances. Other peaceful options must have been tried. Any intervention must be "proportional". Above all, the "balance of consequences" must be considered: will military intervention do more harm than good?
Gareth Evans asserts that it is on this last question that any proposed military intervention is most problematic, as “any further militarisation in Syria runs the risk of turning what is already a nascent civil war into a full-blown one, with casualties on a much greater scale”. He sees all military options as “counterproductive”, with Annan’s political mediation the only show in town, albeit a tragic one:
Its unstated premise is that enough senior officials in the regime can be persuaded to change course, with enough safe exits for the most divisive figures, to enable the situation to stabilize and reform to start … That is a slim reed for the Syrian people to grasp, but unhappily it’s the only one around.
Hard not to agree that he has a point. But is it good enough?
Think what it means. It boils down to telling all Syrians who want a decent, democratic existence that they need to sit down nicely with the people who are torturing and oppressing them and try to cut a deal. That very process empowers the oppressors, not the oppressed. It defines the likely outcomes in ways which are more likely than not to allow some of the contemporary world’s most heinous villains to stroll away from their crimes, or even stay in political business indefinitely. It is not difficult to see why Moscow and Beijing might think that that is quite a handy outcome.
The idea that struck me most in Gareth Evans' piece was his (probably accurate) claim that any further militarisation in Syria ran the risk of creating a full-blown civil war with casualties on a much greater scale. The implication is that this would be a Bad Thing.
This week I was in sunny Prague. I was reminded of the stunning day in Wenceslas Square on 19 January 1969 when a young history student called Jan Palach doused himself in petrol and fell in flames, dying of his terrible injuries three days later.
Of course the context for his self-immolation was the Soviet invasion of his country a few months earlier to suppress the Prague Spring reform initiatives. Palach hoped that his action would compel the Czechoslovak population to confront its own fatalism in the face of their oppression and humiliation. In a sense he succeeded. A vast crowd attended his funeral. But not much changed immediately. It took a full 20 years before anti-communist demonstrations in "Palach Week" helped set in motion the fall of communism in Czechoslovakia in late 1989.
How do we look at Palach’s self-sacrifice now? An act of sublime heroism and moral leadership? Or a doomed and ultimately pointless waste of life?
One of the iconic principles of the Soviet Union still proclaimed by President Putin is the unimaginable sacrifice by the Soviet army and the general population to defend their country from the Nazis during World War Two. Indeed, any attempt to qualify that heroism and sacrifice (eg by pointing out that the war started because of a dirty deal between Stalin and Hitler at the expense of Poland, and that Soviet losses were far worse than they should have been because Stalin had murdered so many top generals) is furiously denounced by the current Moscow elite. In other words, the results justified the incredible loss of life used to achieve them. The fact that Soviet soldiers died in their tens of thousands attacking Berlin in the final frenzied days of the war is a measure of their country's greatness.
By contrast we are solemnly told by Annan and Evans (and by Moscow and Beijing) that much the best way forward for freedom-loving Syrians is to lay down their arms and start talking to the people brutalising them. Any escalation in their struggle which leads to greater casualties has to be avoided. More people could die! It could be destabilising!
I think Kofi Annan and Gareth Evans are wrong for one specific reason. They appear to put no value on the idea of fighting and dying for freedom as an end in itself.
The Syrian people should sneer at Gareth Evans’ "slim reed". They do have other options. Namely to escalate the conflict come what may, with whatever outside support they can get, deciding that it is better to die for freedom than slink around for a few decades more as slaves.
The more fiercely and mercilessly they fight and die, the more legitimate their cause will become. And the more bleak the final reckoning for those in their country and in smug international capitals who took sides against them.
Tags: Gareth Evans, Jan Palach, Kofi Annan, Syria
***
Charles Crawford
Charles Crawford retired from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in 2007. He was HM Ambassador in Sarajevo (1996-1998), in Belgrade (2001-2003) and most recently in Poland (2003-2007). He is a founder member of ADRg Ambassadors and his personal website is www.charlescrawford.biz
***
Showing 1-25 of 115 comments
arcadian
Yesterday 12:05 PM
Surely a comparison to what has happened in Iraq to 100 000s of people over the past 5 years is more relevant than what happened to an individual in Prague over 40 years ago?
Sorry, I found the analysis a bit strange
Jedibeeftrix
Yesterday 08:17 AM
"This idea of the "responsibility to protect" (or R2P as it is wittily known) has considerable moral force."
The point of the libya conflict surely, to provide reinforcing precedent for a doctrine that permits the continued relevance of Britain and France on the security council.
______ randal
Yesterday 09:19 AM
"The point of the libya conflict surely, to provide reinforcing precedent for a doctrine that permits the continued relevance of Britain and France on the security council."
Coming from you, I'm not sure if you are being darkly cynical, or enthusiastically idealist with that suggestion :-)
Hopefully Libya was a body blow to the sovereignty-ending "R2P", and Syria finished it off, and now we've just got to endure some twitching and death-rattling before it's all over.
____________ Jedibeeftrix
Yesterday 10:09 AM
hah!
we remain within a westphalian system yet, but R2P was created with British input to revoke westphalian principle only under very specific conditions.
given the move to a post-westphalian system is happening anyway it seems better to manage and limit the evolution in ways acceptable to us, no?
____________ randal
Yesterday 10:49 AM
"given the move to a post-westphalian system is happening anyway it seems better to manage and limit the evolution in ways acceptable to us, no?"
Since the "westphalian system" was merely a move in the direction of formally recognising underlying principles of nationhood and national sovereignty, I don't think what follows it will necessarily involve a retrenchment from said sovereignty (although I accept it might, and technological advance clearly puts national sovereignty and territorial exclusivity under pressure).
But as a general principle, I don't trust notions of government "managing" change because governments are, in general, not competent to do so. Let our government try to manage the evolution in a particular direction, and the unintended consequences and/or blowback are likely to be very painful, and the actual objective not achieved.
All we can and should do beyond protecting our own direct interests is try to shore up national sovereignty and self-determination principles as much as we can in the face of the shrinking world, imo.
notoshariah
03/27/2012 11:30 PM
Is it my imagination, or is there a clear association throughout the world between the "Religion of Peace" and the absence of peace?
SyrianSoldier
03/27/2012 09:38 PM
Charles Crowford.. you are calling the west to intervene and stop the mass murder as you are saying.
to be honest with you, mass murder is seen when you intervene.. and would expect your explanation of the hundred plus thousand civilians killed by direct bombardment of Liby by Nato... and the thousands killed so far after the end of Nato operations declaring freedom and democracy in Libya
And who has been killed so far in Syria is to a large extent due to your intervention by supplying the rebels with arms including mortar shells and anti-Tank missiles.
I believe most of your readers has replied to you very very well to whom we raise the hat...
I ask God that every penny you are paid to spill our blood is paid on your health... not sure I got it right, but God knows...
______ hatebigots
Yesterday 01:44 PM
Syrianpuppet,
if "hundred plus thousand civilians killed by direct bombardment of Liby by Nato..." is a true story why no one says that number but you?
Why international Amnesty when exposed NATO`s brutalities accused it of killing 555 civilians?
Not the " hundred plus thousand civilians" you made up?
Your propaganda sucks. N
No wonder there are no demonstrations against West in Syrian conflict!
Except a few ones with half dozen slave minded fools.
______ hatebigots
Yesterday 01:41 PM
Syrianpupet,
Your master ASSad murdered 900 people so far;
Your master ASSad refused to negotiate with rebels;
Your master ASSad insisted in shooting protesters until thwey and many soldiers started to fight back.
Your master ASSad broke his promises of ending the vioplence at least 5 times at least 4 times:
-when Arabian League agreed with him to give him 3 days to stop violence;
-when that same League send a comission to Syria
- when he told to UN secretary Ban ki Moon he will end it almost a year ago (ban ki mon calling a liar when the massacres continued)
- when told that to Turkeys PM the same BS.
No NATO nor WEest soldiers in Syria.
And you dont blame ASSad?
Your wages for propaganda worth such ridiculous BS?
windhund
03/27/2012 09:15 PM
Mr Crawford, It's not going to be civil war, it's going to be neo-con liberal interventionism (under the radar) backed by NATO/EU states. You are here to just spout disinformation.
______ hatebigots
Yesterday 01:46 PM
And your propaganda for ASSad tyranny is not disinformation?
Not to mention neo-cons were kick out White House when Obama won.
Your prejudiced anti-West views are outdated.
So no word against the 90000 plus syrians murdered by ASSad?
blackarrow
03/27/2012 08:59 PM
"He was HM Ambassador in Sarajevo (1996-1998), in Belgrade (2001-2003) ...."
Methinks we've got a live neocon here, just itching to start another war in the name of "democracy" ... which the Syrians will have infinitely less of, if the fundamentalists we're backing get control.
So Charles, TELL us about Appendix B of the Rambouillet Treaty - making that an unconditional occupation/surrender ultimatum, not a treaty - and how you boys used that to aggressively force the unnecessary Kosovo war on the Yugoslavs. Remember, by the way, that by Nuremberg wars of aggression are a hanging offence.
And please take your warmongering elsewhere. Russia seems ready to take a stand, and Syria and the neocons are NOT worth World War 3.
Lou Coatney, www.coatneyhistory.com
cartimandua
03/27/2012 08:37 PM
Syria has shed loads of chemical weapons. We do not want them to get out
peter35
03/27/2012 08:10 PM
Two things I have to say. (1) There will never be Democracy in any islamic country. Cannot be--read the koran! (2) Christians are allowed in Syria under the present regime; but if the West's darlings (muslim brotherhood) overthrow the regime as they did in Egypt, Tunisia, etc, it'll be another Christian bloodbath; does the West want that--apparently.
______ french toast
03/27/2012 08:23 PM
The muslim brotherhood are not the wests darlings...
____________ peter35
Yesterday 01:18 AM
Oh really, Govt toppled in Egypt; who's in charge now? Same in Libya, same in Tunisia. If you didn't know the "brotherhood" was behind the riots you're just as naiive as most western journalists. (And Governments)
____________ hatebigots
Yesterday 01:51 PM
If you thin the "brotherhood" was behind the riots you're just as paranoid as the believers of the BS about jews behind 9/11...
____________ ryeatley
Yesterday 02:12 PM
Bigot: The Muslim Brotherhood was crushed by an excessively brutal campaign by Hafez al-Assad. It's now making a comeback, and is most certainly involved
____________ hatebigots
Yesterday 02:17 PM
RealNazy,
9000 people murdered by ASSad.
Very very few terrorist attacks by islamists.
But its all fault of islamists! Because all civilians fed up with ASSad`s dictatorship are islamists!
I gave up my hope of reading an honest and rational comment from you,RealNazy...
____________ ryeatley
Yesterday 06:23 PM
Bigot: "9000 people murdered by ASSad."
That's not true, is it.
____________ hatebigots
Yesterday 06:51 PM
RealNazy,
repeating like a kid "That's not true, is it.", wont make your beloved ASSad`s propaganda more credible.
Nor your gullibility less pitiful.
But ASSad`s BS is true, isnt it... For you.
____________ ryeatley
Yesterday 09:00 PM
So, Bigot is the sentence "9000 people murdered by ASSad" true or not?
____________ french toast
Yesterday 08:42 AM
You really think any of this would have got to this stage had the said govenments had used DEMOCRACY in the first place instead of buturing them?? its YOU who is naive, the stupid tin pot dictators got what they deserved..and they were stupid enough to go down the route they did..all for keepoing power for them selfs..nothing else.
As i have already said, thera are loads of different cultures/religions/ tribes living right net to each other in all these Arab countries, is not democracy that had caused this..nor the west...not even the muslim brotherhood..they are gangsters with there oiwn agenda that can ONLY FUNCTION WHEN SOCIETY BREAKS DOWN something that the selfish short sighted govenments let happen by NOT LISTENING TO THE PEOPLE IN THE FOIRST PLACE.. do you think we would have got to this stage if there were fair elections?? decent human rights in the county?? a fair legal system?? leaders not using the counties GDP tofill their own bank accounts?? get a grip.
Let me tell you if society breaks down in any country you will have gangs and different cultures stick togther against others...its a natural human reaction to group togther and fight for territory..has been for thousands of years...you cant use a breakdown of society and this happening as an excuse for govenments abusing the population for DECADES untill a revolt happens.
There was an easy way out of this..it just needed the dictators to hold a fair election..nothin else.
____________ ryeatley
Yesterday 02:06 PM
Bigot: "had the said govenments had used DEMOCRACY in the first place"
It took him a long time, but Gaddafi offered internationally supervised elections during "our" regime-change action against him.
In Syria they've just had a referendum which removes the supreme position of Assad's Baath party - and a clear majority of the overall electorate voted it in. They have elections scheduled for May the 7th., and have actually accepted the U.N. six-point plan, which refers to:
o - an effective United Nations supervised cessation of armed violence in
all its forms by all parties to protect civilians and stabilize the
country
amongst other things. The plan put forward by the U.N. and accepted by the Syrian government may be found at:
http://www.un.org/News/Press/d...
So, that's progress, isn't it - and there is hope for a political solution, isn't there.
____________ hatebigots
Yesterday 02:13 PM
RealNazy:
Gaddafi duc also said Libya was a "real" democracy for 42 years during his rule , that we was not a ruler.
He also said he would win the "internationally supervised election"
RealNazy, after ALL cases of dictators who promised free election in places like Burma, Cambodja, my country and broke all their promises, isnt pathetic your gullibility?
In Syria they've just had a referendum which removes the supreme position of Assad's Baath party?
Didnt Assad's Baath party won all election in Syria with 97 % of votes?
Becuase they were staged?
Yes to both questions.
Didnt ASSad made promises to end violence for a entire year and broke them all?
Isnt he still massacring civilians while he "accepts" Annan`s proposal with mere words?
Yes to both questions.
Have you ever said SINGLE critic against ASSad?
No.
______________
What do you think ?
Các anh chị nghĩ thế nào, có ý kiến- Phê bình gì qua bài viết "If it brings freedom, a bloody Syrian civil war may be preferable to slavery" của Charles Crawford và 25 Ý kiến- Phê bình từ "115 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
29032012
___________
CSVN là TỘI ÁC
Bao che, dung dưỡng TỘI ÁC là đồng lõa với TỘI ÁC
No comments:
Post a Comment