Last Updated: Wed Feb 08, 2012 10:18 am (KSA) 07:18 am (GMT)

A veto against the Syrian people

Elias Harfoush

Those who are rightfully criticizing the US’s quasi permanent disregard of the international consensus at the Security Council and its use of the veto to protect Israel against the condemnations of its crimes against the Palestinians must really ponder now the deeds of Russia and China, which are using the veto in order to abort an international resolution. This resolution was not necessarily expected to end the tragedy of the Syrians. However, it would have at least sent a message to the Syrian regime on that its deeds against its people do not belong to the type of behaviors that the rulers are using with their people nowadays.

And those who are also rightfully condemning the massacres carried by the Israeli army against the Palestinians using American weapons must also ponder the meaning of the use of Russian tanks and canons from the part of the Syrian security forces as they destroy the Syrian cities and villages over the heads of their inhabitants. Israel is killing a population that it considers to be an enemy and it also considers that this population obtaining its legitimate rights threatens its claims for the right to own the land that it occupies. As for the Syrian army and those who receive their orders from the regime, they are killing their own people because they dared to ask for their right to dignity, freedom, and self determination.

Sergey Lavrov will reach Damascus today. There, he will hear praise and applause from the part of the Syrian government for him and for his government because Moscow stood against the international consensus in order to protect Damascus against the condemnation. But this must not prevent the Russian foreign minister from feeling ashamed because, since that veto was used, the Syrian killing machine allowed itself to kill dozens of civilians in Homs and elsewhere under the cover of that protection. In addition, the Syrian praise must not prevent him from noticing the extent of the Arab anger against his country’s support of a decision that enjoyed an Arab consensus. This anger is only paralleled by the anger felt by the Arab populations against the flagrant American bias towards the Israeli crimes.

The Syrian regime now feels that it is protected from the fate of the Libyan colonel. The Syrian officials are priding themselves in that the military interference is unlikely in Syria. Thus, they are proceeding with the “security solution,” which is no longer just a “popular demand” according to the claims of the Syrian foreign minister but which now has the approval of both Moscow and Beijing. The latter two are establishing a relation of similarity between the actions of the Syrian regime through the use of its powerful military tools and the actions of the dissident army members who are defending their people by using the light weapons that they were able to grab before they broke away.

By defending the Syrian regime, Moscow is actually defending a counterpart that speaks its language, one that has now become obsolete. It is the language of disregarding the populations and considering that the ruler is always right and that the people must obey or…deal with the oppression. This is the language that overthrew the Soviet Union. The leaders of that union had ruled for more than seventy years by terrorizing the oppositionists and sending them to the Gulags as per Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s masterpiece, the Gulag Archipelago. But the Soviet Union was killed with the same weapons that were used to oppress the people as the voices calling for freedom (the glasnost) were stronger than the oppression tools. It is hard to imagine Vladimir Putin restoring the “glory” of his predecessors who ruled over the Kremlin just by merely supporting regimes that resemble them.

It was noteworthy that the Russian government gave orders to its Security Council delegate to use that shameful veto on the day when dozens of thousands of Russians were protesting in the streets of Moscow despite the severe cold brandishing the slogan of “Russia without Putin.” This was a sign to the size of the opposition that is facing the campaign of the Russian prime minister for re-winning the presidency. What did the KGB graduate say in response to his opponents? He described the white ribbons that they wore around their heads as resembling condoms, an indication to how much he disregards his own people. He found nothing better than to accuse these people of being tools in the hand of the American intelligence!

Doesn’t this somehow remind you of the behavior of the SANA agency as it accused the Syrian oppositionists and of the story of the “terrorist armed groups?”

The writer is a prominent columnist. Teh article was published in the London-based al-Hayat on Feb. 7, 2012.

Comments »

Post Your Comment »

Social Media »