War Rhetoric over Syria
Published: 28 August 2013 By Abiodun Giwa
ban ki-moon
Francois Hollande of France was reported in the BBC that he said whoever was responsible for the deployment of chemical weapons in Syria would be punished. Hollande's statement, "France was ready to punish whoever was behind the attack," represents a new turn in the outpour of rhetoric over the situation in Syria, concerning deployment of chemical weapons in Muadhamiya, near Damascus and the western powers resolve to intervene in the fratricide.
Hollande's re-wording of his speech over Syria is not the only new twist in the western powers' announcement to go into Syria. Hollande's position is against those of his allies, whose aim is to go Syria and punish Bashir al- Assad, and if it is the opposition that is found to have used the weapons, it may be a jolly good ride without punishment.
Latest information also reveals that the United Kingdom is saddled with the responsibility of drafting a proposal for the UN's Security Council's approval, a deviation from what one of the dramatic personae has said earlier that they may not require a UN security Council's resolution, knowing that China and Russia will block it.
Hollande had earlier said France was ready to punish Syria, French officials have said France would not be involved in military intervention without a UN Security Council's approval The question that observers are asking is that can Syria receive more punishment than it is already receiving with instruments of war amassed around it, lives being lost in thousands and people trooping out of the country en-masse to be safe from the deadly situation on the ground?
Amid what has essentially been war rhetoric, short of deep thoughts required in times like this, major powers in the West had said it was Syria that was responsible for the deployment of the chemical weapons. John Kerry, United States Secretary of State said,"We know that the regime has been determined to clear the opposition from those very places where the attacks took place. And with our own eyes, we have all of us become witnesses. We have additional information about this attack, and that information is being compiled and reviewed together with our partners, and we will provide that information in the days ahead." Jay Carney, the White House press secretary repeated almost exactly what Kerry has said. that there was no doubt Mr. Assad 's side was responsible and the White House would provide further evidence on the Syrian government culpability, the New York Times reported.
From Washington to Paris, London and Frankfurt, the voice from government houses are say Assad's side has done it with such convincing guts that there will be no be no need for further investigation. But curious members of the public are quietly debating the issue. They think that if the western powers are convinced with the evidence they have claimed that is in their possession, why can they share the same evidence with the public?
And because western powers claim to have evidence it has not made public, Russia thinks otherwise, and it says through its secretary of state, Sergei Lavrov, that it is wrong to attack Syria when there is not yet a confirmation of the truth about which side in the war may have carried out the deadly attack. He cited past precedents in which western powers had intervened in crisis outside its shores without the UN's resolution, and that if the western powers attempt to do it in Syria, the outcome will be different to past experience. Russia expressed its trust for Syria and wondered why the West was aiming to attack Syria ahead of the outcome of the UN's fact-finding mission.
Just as some western powers are threatening to blanket Syria in the coming days with a cloud of smoke, so also is Iran and Syrian governments spokesmen saying the region will become an unmanageable scenario, if the western powers should intervene in Syria.
There is no doubt that observers say based on what was shown on the television and news reported photographs that there was a deployment of chemical attack. The question is that whic side among the combatants may ahve done it.
The UN team on fact-findings in Syria are yet to submit any report. News reports say it will take the team four days to complete its tour of facilities and another uncertain number of days to release its report. The confusion the public has been thrown is that certain reports said the UN's coming report will confirm that chemical weapons has been used, but it may not expressly tell the world who may have used it.
More serious is the case of different shades of fighters in the Syrian war: the Syrian government, the opposition and al-Queda. Al-Queda is reported to be fighting along with the opposition. It has been one of the reasons the western powers have been reluctant to provide arms to the opposition in the fight against the Syrian authoritarian regime.
Hollande's re-wording of his speech over Syria is not the only new twist in the western powers' announcement to go into Syria. Hollande's position is against those of his allies, whose aim is to go Syria and punish Bashir al- Assad, and if it is the opposition that is found to have used the weapons, it may be a jolly good ride without punishment.
Latest information also reveals that the United Kingdom is saddled with the responsibility of drafting a proposal for the UN's Security Council's approval, a deviation from what one of the dramatic personae has said earlier that they may not require a UN security Council's resolution, knowing that China and Russia will block it.
Hollande had earlier said France was ready to punish Syria, French officials have said France would not be involved in military intervention without a UN Security Council's approval The question that observers are asking is that can Syria receive more punishment than it is already receiving with instruments of war amassed around it, lives being lost in thousands and people trooping out of the country en-masse to be safe from the deadly situation on the ground?
Amid what has essentially been war rhetoric, short of deep thoughts required in times like this, major powers in the West had said it was Syria that was responsible for the deployment of the chemical weapons. John Kerry, United States Secretary of State said,"We know that the regime has been determined to clear the opposition from those very places where the attacks took place. And with our own eyes, we have all of us become witnesses. We have additional information about this attack, and that information is being compiled and reviewed together with our partners, and we will provide that information in the days ahead." Jay Carney, the White House press secretary repeated almost exactly what Kerry has said. that there was no doubt Mr. Assad 's side was responsible and the White House would provide further evidence on the Syrian government culpability, the New York Times reported.
From Washington to Paris, London and Frankfurt, the voice from government houses are say Assad's side has done it with such convincing guts that there will be no be no need for further investigation. But curious members of the public are quietly debating the issue. They think that if the western powers are convinced with the evidence they have claimed that is in their possession, why can they share the same evidence with the public?
And because western powers claim to have evidence it has not made public, Russia thinks otherwise, and it says through its secretary of state, Sergei Lavrov, that it is wrong to attack Syria when there is not yet a confirmation of the truth about which side in the war may have carried out the deadly attack. He cited past precedents in which western powers had intervened in crisis outside its shores without the UN's resolution, and that if the western powers attempt to do it in Syria, the outcome will be different to past experience. Russia expressed its trust for Syria and wondered why the West was aiming to attack Syria ahead of the outcome of the UN's fact-finding mission.
Just as some western powers are threatening to blanket Syria in the coming days with a cloud of smoke, so also is Iran and Syrian governments spokesmen saying the region will become an unmanageable scenario, if the western powers should intervene in Syria.
There is no doubt that observers say based on what was shown on the television and news reported photographs that there was a deployment of chemical attack. The question is that whic side among the combatants may ahve done it.
The UN team on fact-findings in Syria are yet to submit any report. News reports say it will take the team four days to complete its tour of facilities and another uncertain number of days to release its report. The confusion the public has been thrown is that certain reports said the UN's coming report will confirm that chemical weapons has been used, but it may not expressly tell the world who may have used it.
More serious is the case of different shades of fighters in the Syrian war: the Syrian government, the opposition and al-Queda. Al-Queda is reported to be fighting along with the opposition. It has been one of the reasons the western powers have been reluctant to provide arms to the opposition in the fight against the Syrian authoritarian regime.
Comment Form is loading comments...
