The world community’s reaction to America‘s desperate fanatical drive to war in Syria, which seems matched only by the irrational violent and insane behaviour of the Syrian-liver-eating-opposition, left Washington looking like a desperate schoolyard bully looking for a little kid to beat up for his lunch money. Only this time the bully has Tomahawk missiles hides in an “armoured car”.
Russia’s reaction was coherent and unwavering from the beginning of the conflict and the latest escalation saw some of the harshest statements so far to come out of Moscow. Aleksandr Lukashevich, the official spokesman for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MID), stated that Washington’s statements threatening to use military force against Syria unilaterally are unacceptable. He said, “Given the lack of evidence, any unilateral military action bypassing the UN Security Council, no matter how limited it is, would be a direct violation of international law and would undermine the prospects for a political and diplomatic solution to the conflict in Syria and will lead to a new round of confrontation and victims”. He went on to say, “Instead of executing the decisions of G8’s summit in Lough Erne and subsequent agreements to submit comprehensive report from experts investigating possible cases of use of chemical weapons in Syria to the UN Security Council, in the absence of any evidence, we hear threats of a strike on Syria”. Lukashevich emphasised that even “American allies” want to wait for the completion of the UN chemical expert group “in order to get an unbiased picture of what really happened and decide on further steps in terms of the Syrian crisis”.
On Friday, Russia welcomed the British Parliament’s rejection of military action against Syria and warned that such an attack without UN approval would deal a major blow to the existing world order. Yuri Ushakov, President Putin‘s chief foreign policy aide, said the British vote showed a growing public understanding of the dangers of an attack against President Bashar al-Assad‘s régime, saying, “This reflects the majority opinion amongst the British and Europeans. It seems to me that people are starting to understand how dangerous such scenarios are”. For some, the USA seems to be behaving like the brutal owner of a dog who beats his pet into submission and understands nothing but violence and force. US President Barack Obama, rather than encouraging dialogue, diplomacy, and intelligent debate, decided unilaterally, as he put it, to “teach President Assad a lesson”.
NATO won’t provide support
The latest defection from America’s war lust was NATO, with Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen officially stating that NATO has no plans to join the USA in military action in Syria, and that such intervention would require the approval of all 28 NATO member countries. Unlike the military aggression in Libya, most European countries failed to support the latest urgent attempts by the USA to launch an immediate military action against Syria.
US Secretary of State provides no proof
On Friday, US Secretary of State John Kerry gave a lacklustre speech, the beginning of which was delayed for more than an hour. Kerry looked pale, resigned, and gaunt, lacking any kind of enthusiasm, being almost robotic in his delivery. His speech, which was no doubt intended to cement and inspire a drive for war in Syria, was unconvincing, and left one, from the start, waiting for expected evidence that he never presented. During the speech, Mr Kerry robotically used the phrase “we know” 23 times, the phrase “I know” once, but the key word the world was waiting for, “proof”, was never heard. As for “evidence”, he cited the “high confidence” of the “American Intelligence Community” and evidence available on the internet. He stated that the US government wouldn’t repeat the “Iraq moment” (a whimsical and lackadaisical sounding way to name war-crimes and war-lies), but the only difference so far was that no evidence was presented whatsoever. No yellowcake, no 45-minute-WMDs, no satellite photos of chemical weapons trailers and supposed weapons and chemical production sites, no outrageous shocking witness statements, nothing. Just endless rhetoric and statements, after which one almost expects to hear, “You believe me, don’t you?”
Calls for adherence to international law and UN standards
The UN is currently investigating, and rather than waiting for the UN to complete the investigation, the USA continues to drive for an invasion and is willing to do so unilaterally, or as they say, to use some kind of “limited bombardment” to implement their “humanitarian” aggression. Many countries called for calm; they want the USA to wait for the conclusion of the investigation, for a UN Resolution, and to adhere to international law.
UK Parliament and impassioned speech
In a 29 August speech, British MP George Galloway from the Respect Party cited public opinion polls showing that only 11 percent of Britons support the UK going to war against Syria, whilst, interestingly enough, only 6 percent of Americans do so. Britain put it to a vote, but the USA seems to be simply waiting for its imperial president to give the order; gone are the days of Congressional votes and declarations of war, it’s just the “decider in chief” and his whims. During his impassioned speech, Mr Galloway repeated Labour leader Ed Miliband’s statements that there’s no compelling evidence that the chemical weapons attacks that took place in Syria were the responsibility of President Assad. He stated that the American assertion that Assad was “mad enough” to launch a chemical weapons attack on the very day that he’d allowed UN chemical weapons inspectors into the country, and, furthermore, was insane enough to do so right in Damascus, was ridiculous. The MP made the very astute observation that if such a madman was ruling the country, what would he do if the West launched a barrage of Tomahawk missiles?
At the emergency session of the House of Commons, the esteemed Mr Galloway wondered aloud as to why if Mr Assad were such a monstrous madman, why was he allowed as a guest at Buckingham Palace just a few years ago, and why was he recommended for an honour and hailed as a moderniser. He said the narrative changed because someone decided on régime change. He said that people were uneasy because they can see the character of the Syrian opposition. He mentioned the Syrian opposition leader who filmed himself cutting open the chest of a Syrian soldier and eating his heart and liver and video showing the decapitation of Christian priests. These facts cause terror amongst all 23 minority groups in Syria; this is what they fear will happen if the opposition wins. Finally, he asked the House when was it when the Russians and Chinese had ceased to be members of the international community, and who the USA was to unilaterally decide to invade a country if they couldn’t even convince the UN Security Council of the need for a military operation.
More evidence of American and terrorist involvement in attack
In light of evidence that the chemical weapons were delivered to the “rebels” by Egypt, and that the attacks were carried out by these same “rebels”, as well as recent threats against Russia by Saudi Prince Bandar to President Putin over Russia’s support for Syria, it’s time the world took a long hard look at who the real “madmen” here are.
Voice of Russia World Service