Syria

I’ve always considered this blog a personal conduit for my expression and thought and oftentimes I say how I feel. However, I find myself in a predicament of wanting to say so much and also being speechless.

Today Theresa May said that the ‘international community isn’t going to stand by and allow chemical weapons to be used with impunity’ when referring to the decision by the USA, Britain and France to launch air strikes to degrade the Assad regime in Syria and help the rebels.

I can’t believe that such a decision was made, I can’t believe the level of hypocrisy involved and I can’t believe the situation as a whole. Let me start by saying that this is not an Assad appreciation post, nor is it an attempt to show anything but sympathy to those in Syria who have suffered due to his regime and monstrosities. Assad has always held one ideology in his mind; one to garner and hold onto power. He is guilty. He is a terrorist. He is wrong. My issue isn’t that he is wrong and we are trying to ‘help’ his victims, but rather that he has been wrong for 7 years and we take notice now? This civil war all started 7 years ago when bombs were dropped onto the peaceful protesters who wanted to oppose the regime that caused them unemployment, misery and uncertainty. Now let’s stop here. At this moment in time the protest was due to take place and it was no secret that Syria’s economy wasn’t performing that well- why is it then that we overlooked this as a western society and didn’t help. Was this because we didn’t know where the money would go in such a corrupt regime? Well, no. It wouldn’t have been the first time we funded a corrupt regime, after all let’s look at the government we set up in Iran in the 1990s or in the Philippines after World War II. Was it because we didn’t have the resources seven years ago? Umm, no. If the USA was ready to sign a secret CIA order to send trainers for the rebels in 2013, they could have afforded to send diplomats and help in 2011. The fact was that these people weren’t helped and any qualification to say argue circumstantially or otherwise can’t possibly be seen as legitimate when we can send ‘aid’ now- in a society faced with dealing with Brexit, a possibility for Russian retaliation after the expulsion of diplomats from every side and in the face of adversities we have today, ones we had seven years ago.

So, it all escalated, violence and rebel groups broke out. We saw Russia aid its closest ally in Assad and the USA help the rebels- sounds familiar, doesn’t it? The USA and Russia trying to take over halves of a nation to fight a proxy war…

This birthed ISIL, a branch of the rebels who decided to make the most out of the situation and take over other territories. It was a square; the rebels, Assad, the Kurds and ISIL. What did we do? We decided to condemn the use of chemical weapons on the part of Assad but focus on ISIL. We spent four years fighting them whilst Assad took over most of his territory and took away all rebel urban strongholds.

Then Trump came. He vowed to allow Assad to rule and not take action in Syria… right. Assad used his chemical weapons again, yet this time it was seen as too inhumane and Trump changed his mind on the entire situation. He decided to advocate for the rebels and warned of action. We stand here a year later with final intervention and I want to know why. We didn’t do this because it was a war crime; after all, Assad has used these weapons for years and who are we to intervene now? We didn’t fight when Agent Orange or Napalm were used to kill Vietnamese people and tarnished their beautiful countryside, we gave the people responsible for the Mai Lei massacre a slap on the wrist, we stood by when the youth of the day were silenced at Kent State, we didn’t lift a finger when Nagasaki and Hiroshima were done to prove a point, but we want to say something now? We want to use yet another country as a proxy for a Russian and USA conflict?