'A bumpy ride for the US over SyriaBy Farrah Hassen
With one deadly strike, the George W Bush administration has offered a fitting epitaph to its "might makes right" policy towards Syria - and the rest of the Middle East.
On October 26, nine days before the election, American special operations forces, allegedly pursuing a "top operative" from al-Qaeda in Iraq, carried out a helicopter attack on Sukkariyah, a small Syrian village nine kilometers from the Iraqi border.
US officials claim the "successful operation" raid killed Abu Ghadiya, an Iraqi suspected of heading an insurgent cell. A Wall Street Journal editorial not only praised the strike but added, "[Democratic presidential candidate Barack] Obama has promised he'll engage Syria diplomatically as part of an overall effort to end the conflict in Iraq. If he really wants to end the war faster, he'll pick up on Syria where the Bush administration has now ended."
The details of the attack remain murky and the White House has declined to comment. Not so murky is the fact that eight Syrian civilians, including a farmer, three children, and a fisherman, died as a result of the strike.
They were all victims of collateral damage, like the Iraqis and Afghans who have perished as a result of Bush's reckless wars.
Questions
Numerous questions abound about the timing, purpose, and legality of the strike. Was the attack directed specifically against Syria, which has cooperated with the United States in the "war on terror" and the Iraq War, or is it more of a desperate pre-election move by the Bush administration to showcase the image of stability and US resolve?
Other pundits have called the attack a "parting shot" from Bush and neo-conservatives in his administration, who have long advocated but failed to bring regime change to Damascus, particularly in response to Syria's early opposition to the invasion of Iraq.
By violating Syrian airspace and apparently not consulting the Syrians about its supposed intelligence on Abu Ghadiya ahead of the attack, the Bush administration has confirmed, yet again, its disdain for international law and the principles of the United Nations Charter.
Indeed, the United States, in the name of fighting "terrorists", has carried out other cross-border raids in recent months, including against the Taliban along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. In justifying the Syria attack, a senior US official told The Washington Post: "You have to clean up the global threat that is in your backyard, and if you won't do that, we are left with no choice but to take these matters into our hands."
Does this standard apply to other countries and legitimize their counter-terrorism operations? Imagine if Cuba offered a similar justification for going after scores of Cuban exiles in Miami who have acted anti-former Cuban president Fidel Castro, including Orlando Bosch and Luis Posada Carriles, who carried out the October 6, 1976, bombing of a Cuban civilian airliner, killing all 73 passengers and crew members on board.
Strange timing
US accusations against Syria that it's "not doing enough" to secure its porous, 480-kilometer-long border with Iraq are not new, but a look at the facts offers a contradictory view.
As a country that has absorbed at least 1.5 million Iraqi refugees since
2003 (more than any of Iraq's other neighbors) which fears the spillover effects of violence and sectarianism on its own borders, and as one which has pursued a strategy of engaging Iraq's various political players (Moqtada al-Sadr traveled to Damascus in February 2006), Syria logically has good reason to work towards the emergence of a stable Iraq.'
On October 26, nine days before the election, American special operations forces, allegedly pursuing a "top operative" from al-Qaeda in Iraq, carried out a helicopter attack on Sukkariyah, a small Syrian village nine kilometers from the Iraqi border.
US officials claim the "successful operation" raid killed Abu Ghadiya, an Iraqi suspected of heading an insurgent cell. A Wall Street Journal editorial not only praised the strike but added, "[Democratic presidential candidate Barack] Obama has promised he'll engage Syria diplomatically as part of an overall effort to end the conflict in Iraq. If he really wants to end the war faster, he'll pick up on Syria where the Bush administration has now ended."
The details of the attack remain murky and the White House has declined to comment. Not so murky is the fact that eight Syrian civilians, including a farmer, three children, and a fisherman, died as a result of the strike.
They were all victims of collateral damage, like the Iraqis and Afghans who have perished as a result of Bush's reckless wars.
Questions
Numerous questions abound about the timing, purpose, and legality of the strike. Was the attack directed specifically against Syria, which has cooperated with the United States in the "war on terror" and the Iraq War, or is it more of a desperate pre-election move by the Bush administration to showcase the image of stability and US resolve?
Other pundits have called the attack a "parting shot" from Bush and neo-conservatives in his administration, who have long advocated but failed to bring regime change to Damascus, particularly in response to Syria's early opposition to the invasion of Iraq.
By violating Syrian airspace and apparently not consulting the Syrians about its supposed intelligence on Abu Ghadiya ahead of the attack, the Bush administration has confirmed, yet again, its disdain for international law and the principles of the United Nations Charter.
Indeed, the United States, in the name of fighting "terrorists", has carried out other cross-border raids in recent months, including against the Taliban along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. In justifying the Syria attack, a senior US official told The Washington Post: "You have to clean up the global threat that is in your backyard, and if you won't do that, we are left with no choice but to take these matters into our hands."
Does this standard apply to other countries and legitimize their counter-terrorism operations? Imagine if Cuba offered a similar justification for going after scores of Cuban exiles in Miami who have acted anti-former Cuban president Fidel Castro, including Orlando Bosch and Luis Posada Carriles, who carried out the October 6, 1976, bombing of a Cuban civilian airliner, killing all 73 passengers and crew members on board.
Strange timing
US accusations against Syria that it's "not doing enough" to secure its porous, 480-kilometer-long border with Iraq are not new, but a look at the facts offers a contradictory view.
As a country that has absorbed at least 1.5 million Iraqi refugees since
2003 (more than any of Iraq's other neighbors) which fears the spillover effects of violence and sectarianism on its own borders, and as one which has pursued a strategy of engaging Iraq's various political players (Moqtada al-Sadr traveled to Damascus in February 2006), Syria logically has good reason to work towards the emergence of a stable Iraq.'
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten