Russia’s new step in Syria’s conflict, a plan against Arab League’s sluggishness

Gennady Gatilov, the Deputy Foreign Minister of Russia, in his tirade against ‘Friends of Syria’ in Istanbul on 1st April, discredited the entire meeting. He stated that ‘many Syrians do not consider ‘Friends of Syria’ as their friend’. Indeed, few diplomats reckon that FOS members are bought by Israel.

Until last week, the 6 point peace plan of UN Envoy Kofi Annan and Assad’s acceptance proved to be another matter to ignore. Clashes grew further worse. On one hand, Assad who calls the rebellions as foreign agents or terrorists. demanded their surrender while the rebels wanted the government’s military to halt. For sometime, it seemed like the ‘Israel-Palestine’ conflict is wearing another disguise.  I wonder what Critical Theorists and Contructivists would define this respective scenario as.

In another major development, the Arab League perhaps has not learnt from its failure in Iraq’s meeting. Now, the Arab League wants to embark on the special mission of initiating an Arab League Tribunal in Syria to impart justice to the war crimes. New York Times gladly mentions the success of such tribunals in Serbia, Bosnia and Croatia. But the plan will not work. Firstly, Syria is smart enough to understand that this is another conspiracy of the Arab countries. Nothing but a vindictive measure to punish Syria for its political diplomacy with Iran. Secondly, has the international community obliterated to the results of Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa which gave dismal results for the anti-apartheid struggle.

But what is much more interesting right now is the sudden invitation of Russia towards the Foreign Minister of Syria. Next Tuesday Syrian foreign minister, Walid al-Moallem will hold talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, a diplomat who has been getting a lot of media attention lately. What interests me is that Russia asked the NCC (the National Coordination Committee) to come over to Moscow but not the SNC and the other defected opposition parties. Undoubtedly, Russia is employing a form of political containment which would ensure different results.

Arab League in Iraq, BRICS Summit in India and Kofi Annan in China: New Failures for Syria

Political diplomacy and democracy enlargement touches new boundaries with the Arab League, BRICS and UN Envoy Annan, all discussing about ‘Syria’ this week.

Recently, President Bashar al- Assad agreed to adopt the 6-point peace plan forwarded by UN -Arab League Envoy Annan. No doubt, it was an intelligent move, as the statement is not a UN resolution, it does not demand Assad’s departure and no immediate date has been mentioned when this plan should be implemented. One can witness history repeating itself when the US Senators start the chorus of arming the opposition in Syria and UN Humanitarian Chief Navi Pillay states that there is ample evidence to arrest Assad. The same happened in the case of Libya when ICC issued arrest warrants against Colonel Gadaffi while David Cockburn revealed that both Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch do not have evidence. No doubt, its not a conscientious choice to support Assad. But then again, we have to realise that at present, he is the one who is actually controlling Syria. If he goes away, who will take the responsibility that Libya does not shatter into a civil war.

Arab League Summit in Iraq

As far as the Arab Summit is concerned, its more of a long awaited opportunity for Baghdad to enter the limelight again. Unfortunately, only seven out of the 22 member states are attending the meeting. Qatar and Saudi Arabia have declined to join it. In fact, the Emir of Kuwait is the sole representative from Gulf countries to be present in Iraq. Sectarian issues are predominant here. Grudges against Sunni Arab majority being dominated by the Shiite government is unacceptable to Qatar. Nothing is more evident than the fact that Iraq’s PM Nouri al-Maliki has a lot of struggle to go through. No doubt, just like the ‘Friends of Syria‘ conference that took place in Tunisia last February, this Arab Summit is also not going to yield any specific results. Syria is no longer a part of Arab league and its Foreign Ministry is not going to accept any decision marked in this conference.

BRICS Summit in New Delhi

Talking about BRICS and how all these countries should really kick off an enigmatic and prudent head start in Syria’s case, everything turns sarcastic immediately. This week, Yeshi, a Tibetian revolutionary set himself on fire in New Delhi. Tibetans have been protesting against China’s embark to India as police officials jail them in. So, on one hand, India is trying to play the role of a saint by talking the measures that should be taken to ease of the burden of Syrian opposition rebels. But look whats happening inside New Delhi itself? Its neither retributive nor restorative justice being imparted to Tibetans.

Kofi Annan in China

Turning to UN envoy Kofi Annan, it seems, quite superficially that here comes a man who can make transparent changes. This week, he was in Beijing to talk with Chinese PM Wen Jiabao. Well, China agreed to support the peace plan but is not very clear whether it means complete commitment till the very end or just a casual backing of the peace plan. Annan also visited Russia and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev raise the same noble concerns. Sadly, diplomacy does not work by paying high profile visits. It concerns me why Vladimir Puntin and Kofi Annan did not meet and if they did, why no press conference has been launched for it. Russia indeed is a crafty situation. Well, Russia might be taking slow cautious steps just as Syria did in recognizing Russian Federation after the collapse of USSR.

Eventually, Syria is not Somalia where anarchy persists and the private sector adopts careful and meticulous moves to sustain the economy. The Syrian economy, or perhaps more, the common everyday livelihood of a Syrian has been effected by the US and EU imposed sanctions. Leaving the economy aside, one after another, all the foreign moves like Arab League Summit, the BRICS Summit and even Kofi Annan’s visit would not reap any results and are completely helpless. Well, perhaps this is exactly the right time to ask oneself, anyways ‘what exactly is the result we are searching for’.

Book Review Contemporary Syria: ‘Liberalisation between cold war and cold peace’

‘Contemporary Syria-liberalization between cold war and cold peace’ is a collection of essays from a conference on Economic and Political Change in Syria held in May 1993 at School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) in London. Eberhard Kienle, a lecturer in Middle Eastern Politics at SOAS had compiled this book. He has also included a brief preface by Patrick Seale which questions the relationship between economic and political liberalisation in Syria during the regime of Hafez al- Assad.

With nine scholarly papers from the speakers at the conference, ‘Contemporary Syria‘ sometimes turns repetitive as every scholar starts with the same fundamental facts. Slowly, the pace is picked, other countries like US,Israel, Russia and Lebanon are bought into debate, economic analysis is done and finally, the paper tends to be different. Over and over again, it is declared that Hafez saw no connection between economic and popular freedoms, encouragement for private sector and progress towards democracy and between increasing cordial relations with US and power sharing along with respect for human rights.

The author could have used a better title for the book because the term ‘Liberalization between cold war and cold peace’ does not make immediate sense. Also, there is very limited, if any, mention of cold war and its effect on Syria in any of the included papers. Syria is exposed as a state where ‘liberalisation‘ is eclipsed by ‘liberation’ from adverse effects of forces of imperialism and Zionism.

Economic liberalization in Syria took place in two distinct parts. Intifah is used as an Arab currency term for defining this process but it was later abandoned after it matched with Sadat’s strategies.

The first process started soon after Hafez took power from 16th November 1970. The private sector started entering into manufacturing and tourism. It also gained importance especially after October War of 1973 as the scope of intifah towards private sector and Western companied opened.  This phase involved political restructuring such as establishment of parliament in 1971 and adoption of a new constitution in 1973. National Progressive Front involving Ba’ath parties, Arab Socialist Union, Syrian Communist Parties, Organisation of Socialist Unionists, was established in 1972.

Sarcastically,  ‘popular democracy’ was the code word where Syrian people had to consent to authoritarian rule which served their interests.

The need for second intifah began after 1978 when wages and agricultural procurement prices were affected by inflation, corruption and nepotism. Intervention in Lebanon was unpopular, several Alawis were assassinated between 1979-1982 and finally, the Hama Massacre of 1982. Even the Commercial bank of Syria had declined to provide private sector with foreign exchange needed for imports. In return, black markets and currency smuggling grew. The government imposed the Law no. 24 of 1986 against smuggling of currency. It was only later in 1991, the Law Number 10. was implemented that really opened spaces for private sector investments.

The business class in Syria is politically powerless and fragmented into ‘entrepreneurial class’, ‘business community’, ‘new class’ and ‘bureaucratic bourgeoisie’.  The book explains how Syria has turned into a ‘Military and Merchant Dictatorship.‘ The manner in which power drifted into the hands of military after 1970s revamped the life of these geographically peripheral, socially ascending and ethnically minority sectors of the society.

Syria’s Hafez Assad has also called himself the ‘Gorbachev‘ of Middle East or perhaps better than him. He states that ‘perestroika’ started in the world not in late 1990s but right when Assad started his ‘Corrective Movement’ in 1970s.

One can also learn the the symptom of ‘disunity‘ ,’ lack of leadership’ and ‘scattered organisational tendencies‘ in the Syrian opposition right now is a definite trait of their past. The National Alliance for the liberation of Syria, established after the Hama event, consisted of Muslim Brotherhood and secular parties.  Most of the opposition parties turned into rivals after dealing with issues like ‘how the opposition should be led’ and ‘concrete attack actions’ that should be adopted.

Taking advantage of ‘Divide and Rule Policy,‘ Hafez implemented an intelligent strategy in Lebanon leading to the signing of ‘Mutual Defence Pact’ in September 1991. This pact gave permission to Syrian military presence in Lebanon. In return, the Law No. 10 of 1991 gave Lebanese entrepreneurs economic assets and significant leverage in Syria.

The hardline on Israel was dependent on Eastern Europe and Republic of Commonwealth of Independent States for economic assistance and advice. The combination of intransigence towards Israel, internal economic recovery and continued ties to former Eastern bloc enabled the coalition for senior military and security officials, Ba’ath Party and central administrative officials and managers of public sector enterprises to retain a predominant position within Syria’s politics. Therefore, no matter how much the private sector develops, it would never be able to cause a political liberalisation in Syria.

In a nutshell, the book gives a descriptive and in-depth insight into Syria’s political and economical scenario. It carries a detailed history of Assad regime which makes it comparatively easier to understand even Bashar al- Assad and his country’s political/economic reality.

Kofi Annan’s peace plan’s weakness inspite of Russia and China’s support

On 20th March, Russia stated that it was ready to support France’s presidential statement to UN, procuring Kofi Annan’s peace plan. Suddenly, both Russia and China who had shielded Syria by vetoing against 2 UN resolutions, have changed their alignment.

On the other hand, Kofi Annan who met Assad last month could not create immediate results. In fact, the terms and conditions of his diplomatic talk with Assad have not been made public. Well, I wonder if they would have anyways received more importance than the sudden email leads of Assad and his cosmopolitan wife. These emails storming the news media, perhaps have become a new face of ‘information propaganda war’.

Without meticulous analysis, a common man watching Syrian news is revealed that Assad has been getting guidance from Iran and his father-in-law in London to squash the rebels. Similar to it was the leaked Barbara Walter’s interview preparation when Assad was shown to learn how to give an interview infront of the American public.

Kofi Annan’s peace plan

Turning back to Kofi Annan’s peace plan, it includes 6 points like, both the sides should end violence, daily pauses for humanitarian assistance, release of political prisoners and access to journalists, freedom of assembly for protest and above all, the Syrian government and opposition should work in good faith. Well, the peace plan is a statement and not a resolution that can be legally binded. It portrays nothing but another feeble attempt from the side of West to conquer the Middle East.

‘Different dance for China and Russia’

What disturbs more is that both China and Russia are changing sides. This swift change was perhaps visible from the very time Moscow stated that it would not be granting asylum to Assad. Well, Russia cares for Tartus, its military and its arms trade. It was surprising that it was Tunisia’s president Moncef Marzouki who stated asylum for Assad, not just once but three times, eventually declining his offer. As far as China is concerned, it is anyways known for its ‘transactional diplomacy‘ which involves globe trotting all over the world with a fat checkbook in hand. Both Russia and China are quasi allies, after all, they both were communist blocs, hungry to export their revolutions, all around the world. Their security dilemma and hatred for the West has bought them closer, but how will this relationship affect Syria?

Lessons from Libya, Egypt and Tunisia

On the other hand, perhaps no one is learning from Libya. The NATO unilateralism in Libya has segmented the country between demands of federalism rising amid Benghazi and Tripoli. The Interim government has yet not pursued the war crimes. The Truth and Reconciliation commission is a farce, nothing else. Though, all TRCs have their own problems.

Like the one in South Africa only heard the grievances of 20,000 victims in the anti-aparthied struggle while others were simply forgotten. At the same time, even UN is not forcing these commissions to investigate human rights abuses.

While Egypt is now marching towards Presidential elections and Muslim Brotherhood has finally stated that they would have their own nominee, also. But the government is still ruled by the military and the parliament is just a ceremonial institution. This has made is very difficult for Egypt to obtain a $3.2 billion loan from the IMF.

Turning to Tunisia, the country seems to follow the Turkish model of democracy and rule of law, as it celebrated its Independence day from France in 1956 on 20th March. Tunisian presidents and foreign ministers are engrossed in talking about Libya, setting firms in Italy, petrol prices and welcoming Turkey’s President.

‘Syria’s revolution spills’

Also, Syria’s turmoil will not be limited to its own geopolitics. Lebanon, right now, who played the role of silent supporter for Syria, is facing the consequences. The shells fired in Syria has already started hitting the Lebanese border village of al-Qaa, where severally Syrian refugees are currently hiding. Similarly, the Libyan revolution did spill to Mali while the Egyptian to Sudan. Therefore, with the kind of geopolitical importance that Syria has, the chess board might utterly change, if its revolution gets exported.

‘Turkey and Syria: Is a military confrontation near?’

Meanwhile, in a very discreet manner, Turkey has started establishing a buffer zone at the Syrian side. 500 soldiers have already arrived to look over the current scenario and the migration of refugees. Well, this entire plan, without the knowledge or prior consent of the Damascus regime can lead to military confrontation if Turkey does not play the right cards. The entire situation puts Turkey in a very unconformable situation because it has to also seal its border from the influx of Kurdistan Worker’s Party (PKK) along with the Syrian refugees. Right from last year August, Turkey has been conducting air strikes against the Kurdish camps in Iraq. Few leaked reports have stated that Syrian regime employs Kurdish militia to maintain control over the northern regions- a reason well enough to anger the Turkish Armed Forces.

Russian Navy and Syria’s future?

Recently, there has also been another rumour that a Russian navy has landed a tanker in Syria on its Tartus port. It involves ‘anti-terrorism’ marines to further squash the rebels.  Well, the Damascus regime has currently negated the rumour. Nevertheless, just like the ‘Friends of Syria’ meeting in Tunisia last month, the Kofi Annan Peace Plan seems to fall flat. With Damascus regime being tight lipped, its even difficult to predict the consequences. The May elections predicted by Bashar al Assad would be the next important issue to look at.

Thomas Friedman reveals the Detestable self through ‘There be Dragons’

When Samuel Huntington wrote the ‘Clash of Civilisations’ after the disintegration of USSR, he funneled the odious orientalism of Middle East, Africa and Asia. For him, it was just US and Japan that deserved to dominate. Ten years later, after the September 2001 attacks, Edward Said answered him back with his ‘Clash of Ignorance.’. The title promises the satire at Huntington who was now being judged by an occidentalist.

In 2012, Thomas Friedman, the world renowned Pulitzer award winning New York Times columnist wrote ‘There be Dragons‘. Perhaps his zionist side has added to his complacency when he describes Middle East being the area of ‘dangerous and uncharted locations.’ He states that ‘ In medieval times, areas known to be dangerous or uncharted were often labeled on maps with the warning: “Beware, here be dragons.” That is surely how mapmakers would be labeling the whole Middle East today.’

Without wasting ten more years in this process, I want to answer him immediately for the delusions he carries in his tirade against North Africa, Middle East and West Asia.

1. He states ‘We also tend to believe that inside every autocracy is a democracy dying to get out, but that might not be true in the Middle East.‘

We cannot criticise Lenin, Stalin or Mao for what communism eventually became during their regime because they always lacked the intellectual honesty of Karl Marx. Communism failed. Disastrously. But worse that that is the transformation of democracy into ‘dictatorship of the government.’ Friedman does not mention that when countries like Iran gained their democracy in the early 1950s, it was CIA and America that executed the coup and snatched it away. He does not understand the significance when Ayatollah Khameini stated ‘We believe in democracy and we also believe in freedom, but we do not believe in liberal democracy.’ Perhaps, he considers Saudi Arabia that functions without even a constitution, more competent than other Middle Eastern countries. Also, if democracy is so important, why is Turkey, that has revamped itself for getting a membership in the EU for the past one decade, not respected and used as a snitch? Perhaps, George Bush thought he would make ‘democracy halaal’ in Iraq by invading it. But we all know, it added to the civil war. So, Friedman does not mention the incompetency of western powers to even establish what they believe in. And we do not even need to go to Palestine and how Israel created the Second Holocaust, worse than what Hitler did, to throw Muslims and Christians out of their own homeland. If Friedman craves to see Middle East democratic, he should understand that US had played the role of a ‘devil’s advocate’ in using this entire region as a chess board where his opponents just lost.

2. He states ‘When the iron lid of autocracy comes off, Middle east falls back, not on liberalism, but Islamism, sectarianism, tribalism or military rule.‘

Hardly before 1989 when Salman Rushdie’s book ‘Satanic Verses’ was released, no one knew or talked about Islamism. Later, the 9/11 attacks added to the Islamophobia. Today, the western powers think that ‘Shariah Law’ and ‘Islam’ is connected with ‘terrorism’ or ‘jihad’. In reality, this is not the case. Its not justice to blame Islam when Christianity also has its own loopholes. No one criticizes the Church in Greece or even orders an investigation into the millions of euros that are stored. If they did, Greece, I promise, would not have been in debt. To the outside ignorant public, it is stated that countries like Greece, Italy, Ireland, etc are facing recession because they were ‘welfare states’. If one investigates their economy, what they are facing right now is the result of ‘fiscal irresponsibility’. Anyways, coming back to the point, the ‘Church’ is not questioned. So, if that kind of pattern is followed for Western countries, why can’t the government by mosque or even its sovereignty be such a problem? Friedman does not mention that Muslim Brotherhood, for the past several decades have been carrying out grassroots changes in Egypt, Jordan, Yemen and to a certain extent in Syria.  As far as Salafists are concerned, even the people of Egypt know that they do not want them to rule.

As far as sectarianism is concerned, Friedman forgets that western powers, themselves, have been using this major issue to cause further chaos. He does not talk about Lebanon where the Maronite Christians have been used as an instrument by Roman and French powers to hate Sunnis, Shias, Druze and Kurds. I can not debate about tribalism because Friedman perhaps might find everyone a ‘tribal’ if he is not from US or Israel. And as far as military rule is concerned, he perhaps once again forgot that its US which has been actually strengthening the military of countries like Egypt, Israel, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan by giving them aids and arms.

3.  He states ‘Almost four years ago, we elected a black man, whose name was Barack, whose grandfather was a Muslim, to lead us out of our worst economic crisis in a century.’

Well, when it comes to Barack Obama, his first identity is not the “president’ but a ‘black man’. Friedman thinks that after 200 years and a civil crisis, America could ‘Make it happen.’ But he doesnot mention that ‘Right now, we are forcing the same black man to go on war with Iran’, or he does not mention that ‘ we are trying to make this man whose grandfather was a Muslim force for military intervention in Syria’. You know, what the funny part here is? If Obama does it, he would be called nothing but a stooge like George Bush. If he doesnot, his competitors like Mitt Romney and Ron Paul would call him a coward. Friedman thinks that the civil war in America is over because people are not dying anymore. But what about Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq, where they are being killed?

4. He states ‘You see in Syria how quickly the regime turned the democracy push there into a sectarian war.’

Western powers should not touch the subject of Syria which has become a case of international conspiracy than that of civil war. The western media’s propaganda does not talk about how Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Israel are funding the Free Syrian army by giving them arms. One does not need to think twice for knowing how is behind these proxies. Bashar al Assad has been easily caused the ‘Tyrant’, ‘ The replica of Hafez who caused the massacre in Hamas 30 years back.’. No one knows the reality but everyone judges them. Al Jazeera has been as zionist as ever, in its broadcast, often manufacturing news rather than reporting it. And also, what happened in Libya? There was ‘No Fly Zone’ and the cunning twist of UN’s resolution to causie regime change. Colonel Gadaffi was killed. What happened next? The Libyan Transitional Council is still not able to contain the militancy. But who cares? If Libya could not succeed, its Libya’s problem. No one should question the impeccability of US, Britain and France.

5. He states ‘U.S. troops accidentally burned some Korans, and President Obama apologized. Afghans nevertheless went on a weeklong rampage, killing innocent Americans in response — and no Afghan leader, even our allies, dared to stand up and say: “Wait, this is wrong. Every week in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq, Muslim suicide bombers kill other Muslims — holy people created in the image of God — and there’s barely a peep. Yet the accidental burning of holy books by Americans sparks outbursts and killings. What does our reaction say about us?

Firstly, there is a propaganda by media to just state news that contains suicide bombers killing people in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq. They want to create this public opinion that these countries are unsafe, froth with turmoil and terrorists- and eventually, should be dominated. Its all psychological how this grooming is done. I must ask Friedman how he would react if Afghanis burnt his ‘Old Testament’ or the ‘Bible of Jews’? Jews still consider themselves as victims to what happened decades back. So, why should the natives of Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq forget so soon? They too have faced deaths.

And what difference does it make if Obama did apologize? Friedman criticises Taliban and Al-Qaeda without actually naming them. But then, who created Taliban? Who created Al-Qaeda? He forgets that drone attacks still continue in Pakistan (recently, have started in Syria). He does not go into the depth of why Muslims kill other Muslims. He does not frame them into Pathans or the tribals in Waziristan or the Muhajirs in Karachi.For him, they are one and the same. Muslims killing each other would have been an issue in 1979 when USSR had conquered Afghanistan, now it does not matter. US is in a uni-polar world, an excellent example of social darwinism.

Morals and ethics have no place in real politik. But justice has. Friedman should know that when he points one finger at others, three fingers are pointing at him. Its ignorance and unfortunate use of racism by Friedman to write this article, creating further perceptions for a common American who does not actually know what is happening.

If dragons have to be there, they aren’t in locations but inside of people.

Arming of revolutionaries: A shrewd tactics in international diplomacy

Active promotion of revolutions has been very prominent right from 1790s when the French revolutionaries jumped on the bandwagon for internationalist diplomacy. Over the years, this process of ‘exporting the revolutions‘ has been used by super-powers to thrash the flawed government of developing countries and impose imperialism. They mostly express their impeccability when questioned about the clandestine manner in which they train outside revolutionaries, militants and rebels. But there are few who pay the price. For example, ‘By challenging the legitimacy of all foreign interventions, Bolsheviks invited all foreign governments to challenge their own.’ Interestingly, the Syrian uprising has provided an opportunistic platform to western powers to use their alliances and hegemony to overthrow Assad regime.

In a meeting of  Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Saudi Arabia has backed the arming of Syrian guerrilla groups. Riyadh has been transporting arms to Syria through the Sunni tribal ally groups in Iraq and Lebanon. As Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim al-Thani, Qatar’s prime minister has also backed the arming of Syrian rebels. FSA is being funneled with Russian Anti-tank missiles and sophisticated weapons system from various sympathizers from Assad’s military. Even Libyan interim leader Mustafa Abdul Jalil has supported Syrian rebels as around 600 Libyans have transported on Syrian soil to fight as volunteers.

The Free Syrian Army which is disorganized, cluttered into groups of rebels, has definitely become a fiction mailbox, pretending to reach out to innocent civilians. Marc Lynch has intelligently questioned if the process of arming FSA would lead to any immediate results. He predicts three outcomes out of this phenomenon. First, the rebels use the arms for their defence or secondly, they overpower the Syrian military and force them to surrender.  Finally, the rebels and the military can even out each other’s power and eventually negotiate. What most powers do not think about is that since FSA contains several groups, often splitting due to their lack of agreement. The entire rat race to get arms would cause severe competition in these armed gangs, leading to further chaos and militancy.

Unfortunately, Syria is not like China or Iran where the foreign interventionists and their real agendas can be filtered or understood. For example, the British Embassy in Peking was burnt by Red Guards during the Cultural Revolution in 1967. The US Embassy seizure in Tehran in 1979 during the  Iranian revolution has permanently soured US-Iran relations. At the same time, history is replete with examples where the ‘Syria chapter’ has been repeated, on and on.

• Soviet provisions used to supply arms, training and advisers through Comintern to underground military units in communist countries.
• Chinese supported the Vietnam for opposition to France from 1950-1954.
• Cuba provided aid to Sandinista National Liberation Front in Nicaragua after 1977.
• People’s Democratic Republic of Yemen provided bases and trainings to arm guerrillas to Oman and North Yemen. After its establishment in 1967, it also deployed guerrillas for sporadic clashes with Saudi Arabia.
• Bolsheviks attempted to assist revolutionaries in Mongolia, Iran and Poland in the 1920s.
• Iran supported militants in Iraq, Lebanon and Afghanistan.

On the other hand, just like Russia is supporting arms supplies to Syria, USSR was also involved in arming China and Vietnam during 1950s, Cuba and Vietnam during 1960s and Angola and Mozambique during 1970s. Well, it was Cuba and Vietnam which caused US and USSR to drift apart, eventually dodging the nuclear war in 1962.

Therefore, this entire trend of arming the revolutionaries by powerful nations is not new. One can find the residue of  Marxist internationalist agenda of creating continuous and inevitable world wide revolutionary upheaval in such attempts. Very often, the thin defining line differentiating revolution from nationalism is erased.

In Syria, the uprisings are being used as an ‘instrument’ where the internationalism of western and Arab powers is being adopted for their own selfish interests rather than social justice and social order. There is an evident gap in the overlapping of revolutionary aspiration and capability because most of the Syrian rebels are fighting on abstract and anonymous grounds. It makes them vulnerable and eventuate into mortals fighting on lost cause.

‘Friends of Syria’: Dictatorship of Futile International Diplomacy

The much hyped ‘Friends of Syria’ Conference taking place today in Tunisia is nothing but an embarrassment that US, EU and Arab League would remember.

More than 80 countries are participating in this international conference. Its only Lebanon, China and Russia who chose to ‘disassociate’ themselves from the event. Interestingly, the event is being funded by Qatar (hotel arrangements, travel tickets, bookings) while Tunisia maintains the administrative formality of executing it.

Moncef Marzouki, the President of Tunisia stated in an interview with Al Jazeera that he does not want military intervention in Syria. Syria would not be another Libya because events in this country have gone far more complex and intertwined. He once again urged the need to convince Russia to be supportive.

‘Too many cooks spoil the broth’

FOS itself is divided. Though the draft declaration is still being circulated, the communique states that they would not be supplying arms to Free Syrian Army and Syrian National Council.

While, members of the SNC who are currently in Tunisia have stated that it does not matter what is officially stated, they would eventually be armed.

This is one of the first and very apparent rift that exists in FOS. Well, its obvious to happen this way because such a high number of diplomatic representation at an international issue would have their own polemics, agendas and black propagandas.

‘Just to Impress Russia’

Few countries like Tunisia want to lower down the tone of the communique so that Russia can also be involved in their process, at a later stage. This idea, seems ‘Utopian’ and boorish enough for other Arabian countries who demand a military intervention at any cost (like Qatar).

So one can ponder the impact any declaration that FOS would eventually have if everything done is being customised for Russia or China? Just like the Thursday conference on Somalia in London, this entire FOS facade would be nothing but a posh and unnecessary expenditure for the diplomats, serving no purpose, what so ever.

‘Do not lecture Syria’

Ammar Waqqaf of the Syrian Social Club has stated that ‘If FOS wants humanitarian aid, one must talk directly to the Syrian government rather than lecturing it. Syria is self sufficient in terms of food and medical supply. It can take care of itself.’

He also states that it is assumed that the rebellions are concerned with the lives of the normal civilians, but in reality, they are not. In fact, the rebellions try to show that they have a control over the situation in respective district, but in reality, they are not even musketeers.

‘Differences with SNC’

As if the rifts in FOS were not enough, SNC too is facing opposition from the opposition. The National Coordination for Committee for Democratic Change (NCCDC) boycotted its presence in the FOS. They believe that FOS would be biased in praising SNC and there is not point in having any other Syrian Opposition group in the conference if such partiality continues.

NCCDC believes that it has more contacts in Syria and capability to use its soft power than SNC. In fact, it is based in Damascus itself. Also, NCCDC, chaired by Hassen Abdel Azim, is largely based inside Syria unlike SNC that is based in Istanbul.

Conclusion

If Karl Marx, Engels, Lenin and Guevera were still alive, they would have found nothing abysmal with the Syrian uprising. In fact, it includes every normative demand for being called a ‘revolution’ that has crossed the discursive, generative and paradigmatic process to eventuate into one.

Also, everything from international support, foreign intervention, ambitious yet abstract demands are present. Thomas Paine, perhaps would have credited American revolution of 1763 to be their godfather while Edmund Burke would have written another ‘Reflections’ to rebuke it.

But there’s one subtle point which they all thought but never wrote about. The point is, ‘Sometimes, revolutionaries themselves become part of international conspiracies.’

Reality of Syrian opposition, Assad’s leaked interview and Return of Kofi Annan

Last year, Patrick Cockburn had revealed how both Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch did not have concrete evidence to justify that Gadaffi was involved in causing war crimes and inhuman massacres in Libya.

This year, once again, Cockburn takes another polemic ideology and debates if ‘the preponderance of youtube videos, tweets, blogs and texts from Syrian opposition are actually true?’

In an interesting analysis in The Independent, he states :

‘YouTube pictures may have played a positive role in the uprisings of the Arab Spring, but the international media is largely mute about how easy it is to manipulate them. Pictured from the right angle, a small demonstration can be made to look like a gathering of tens of thousands. Shootings in one street in one town can be used to manufacture “evidence” of shooting in a dozen towns. Demonstrations need not be genuine events luckily captured on mobile phone cameras by concerned citizens; frequently the only reason for the protest is to provide material for YouTube. Television companies are not going to reject or underline the stage management of film that is free, dramatic, up to date – and which they could not match with regular correspondents and film crews even if they spent a lot of money.’

He further adds,

‘In the print press, bloggers get an equally easy ride, even though there is no proof that they know anything about what is going on. Hence the ease with which a male American student in Scotland was able to pretend to be a persecuted lesbian in Damascus. Since the Iraq war, even the most intensely partisan bloggers have been presented as sources of objective information. Tarnished though they may now be, they still have a certain cachet and credibility.’

Also, there’s another interesting incident that has currently taken place.

Bashar’s leaked interview

The hacker group Anonymous attacked the mail server of Syrian Ministry and 100s of emails have been leaked in this process. One of them reveals how Bashar actually planned before the much hyped interview with Barbara Walters. Eventually, the interview just showed him as an incompetent, hairy brained and boorish dictator, often dumb when asked questions regarding his own country.

Here goes the attached manuscript of the leaked PDF of Bashar’s Interview.

‘Its Annan, Koffi Annan’

Indeed, the situation is mushrooming with paroxysm of sarcasm and stupidity. Anyways, what is important right now is the much awaited ‘Friends of Syria’ meeting at Tunisia today morning and also what Kofi Annan does, after being requested to be the joint special envoy on Syria.

Well, it depends because he could not stop the invasion of Iraq by US inspite of being the UN Secretary General at that time. The Ghanaian native, winner of Nobel Peace prize in 2001 and acknowledged for his reforms in the Rwandan genocide, perhaps can turn tables in Syria.

US Drones in Syria, Turkey accepts Mossad’s cooperation

‘If a dog fell into your well, would you remove the dog or empty the well? Once a red dog fell into Afghan well, the International community helped to get it out. Now, a white dog has fallen, what are they doing? They are emptying the well, one bucket at a time.’

By the time the reader fully understands the meaning of every word mentioned above, a melancholy spirit of distaste and pain is generated from within.

The story of Afghanistan after 1989 invasion of Soviet Union followed by American occupation can be rightly explained through the above words.

Interestingly, the same narration travels to Syria now.’The white dog has fallen into Syria’s well. What they are doing now, interestingly, is to increase the size of this well’

‘US drones in Syria: Legal or Illegal?’

The conspiracies and murky bets are turning true. America accepted that there are US drones flying over Syria. After the Iraq war by Bush Administration that worked on the principle of ‘ Either you are with us, or against us’, US is revealing its new colours. How can, one country, inspite of it being a super power, ever have the rightful access to another country’s air space?

Its amazing how the propaganda can be used. US states that its urgent to send drone attacks to Syria so that the real picture can be narrated to the international audience and hence, a stronger international response can be attained.In the terms of international diplomacy, US tends to find ‘intercepts of Syrian government and military communications.’ Well, who will take the blame/ or credit, if President Assad is assassinated in this attempt?

‘The failure of UN, again’

If that has to be the eventual end, I believe there is not point in having meetings of the UN security councils and even the vetoes. It turns out that all these highly acclaimed meetings are nothing but presentations put by paper tigers with no meaning, essence or even motif of sustenance.

‘Syria is not Pakistan’

Syria is not Pakistan that has sold itself under President Musharaff to US. It does not deserve the unmanned drone attacks. In fact, its Russia which has military base in Syria, unlike American bases in Pakistan.Osama bin Laden did not go to hiding in Syria after leaving Sudan. Al-Qaeda and Pathan Taleban are not in Syria. Hence, US knows that it can not use the usual message of ‘War on Terror’.

‘Stalin Versus Obama’

But to carry out the same odious execution, the name will be changed, wile the operation remains the same.

I wonder, whats the difference between US ( as a complete entity) and Stalin? They both are carrying out massive executions and using conspiracies to defend themselves.

‘Turkey’s role in Syria‘

Also, it has been revealed that the Turkey had been training the Free Syrian Army. 40 Turkish intelligence officials have been captured working along with the Syrian opposition. They also confessed that Mossad (The Israeli Intelligence) has been working with them. In fact, Mossad has also been working with the Al-qaeda operative in Jordan to slash out Syria.

One can find one common trail, or a pattern. In the case of Libya, US had relied on Al-Qaeda fighters who belonged to the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) to out Gadaffi. Undoubtedly, in the case of Syria, it is the Free Syrian Army that is being used in the similar manner.

‘Have revolutions failed?’

Perhaps Edmund Burke was right when he smirked at the French Revolution and stated that such occurrences are nothing but a facade. One can see the dwindling path of the uprising in Syria.

Well, someone rightly said, Reason and ignorance, opposites of each other, influence bulk of mankind. If either of these can be rendered sufficiently extensive in a country, the machinery of the government goes on.

But no one said, what happens, if both Assad and US start using the ‘ignorance’ and no reasoning, ever follows.

Why Turkey should not criticise Syria?

As the city of Homs is being bombard by Syrian forces, Turkey’s anger is making it forget that ‘People who live in glass houses should not throw stones at others.’ The frantic Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu is marching to Washington, to lick his own wounds with Hillary Clinton and conspire for another international action against Assad.

Turkey which has often been called as The Sick Man of Europe and even Human Cancer by British PM David Lloyd George after the First World War, today stands in an oblivion. Its not social justice to blame Syria for 6000 death when Turkey’s own shadows are egregiously blood-soaked. The modern country which has cowardly declined to accept the killing of thousands of Armenians under the Ottoman Empire in 1915 still does not accept it as genocide.

‘If you criticize, you are dead’

If it is banned in Syria to criticise Assad, the same jail sentence would be delivered in Turkey if anyone criticizes Ataturk. Even if we try to overlook this fact by crediting that yes, Mustafa Kamal was the hero of Turkey’s war of Independence and lets not trouble his soul, what about the current PM? Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the man who is audaciously changing Turkey so that it becomes a member of EU by 2015 does not allow criticism to his own policies. The ego has bustled to the cost of Turkey’s foreign relations with US and Israel.

Turkey and Syria: Friends with no Benefits

PM Erdogan states that Turkey was an ally of Syria. Well, perhaps he thinks that no one remembers Ankara’s prickly relation with Damascus. Syria wanted the Turkish province of Hatay which was awarded  to Turkey after a referendum when the French pulled out in 1930s. Also, what about the grudge of the Syrians over the water flow of Euphrates River. One must not forget that the World Bank did not finance the famous Ataturk Dam on Turkey’s Euphrates River because it knew that domination would prevail and Turkey did not clearly mention how much water it would allow to flow into Iraq and Syria. Tehran, Damascus and Baghdad have always been Turkey’s enemy.

The Kurdish Question

Turning again to human rights, Turkey itself can not pretend to be a humanitarian neighbor by creating a buffer zone with Syria because Turkey is known for brutual abuse of human rights. Especially, what about the Kurdish question? The thousands of PKK rebels, often found similar to Hamas in Palestine are fighting for their rights and independence for years. Kurds have been facing an 80 year long ban. They are even called the ‘world’s largest nation without a state’. Currently, there are 25 million Kurds. To defend itself, Turkey calls them as ‘Mountain Turks’ rather than actually identifying them.

What if Turkey was Kurdey?

Ahmet Altan, the prominent leftist journalist in Turkey sarcastically questions that what would have happened if Turkey was Kurdey and if Turks became the minority in it? How would Turkey feel if they were called as ‘Oceanic Kurds‘ and never given their own existence? Thankfully,  Kemal Mustafa made Turkey what it is. One should remember that when he fought at the beaches of Gallipoli, he said to his men, ‘I do not ask you to attack, I am ordering you to die.’ He is the same man who told King Edward VIII that Turks were not taught to be servants. Just like Voltaire condemned the role of State and Church during French Revolution, this man abolished the existence of Caliphate in Turkey and made it what it is today.

Conclusion

Both Turkey and Syria are very different from each other, in terms of their democratic and dictatorship regimes, culture, belief, religious majorities and minorities, etc. I do not wish to ignore the massive deaths of innocent civilians in Syria by trying to criticise Turkey. My main aim is to reveal the double standards in international diplomacy and how countries like Turkey who have blood on their own face, who are having difficuly in gulping their own saliva, should be neutral. They should not fight for the defence of others, if they themselves can not deliver justice in their own country.