Supporting/Condemning Syria

• 

Syrians chant anti-Bashar al-Assad slogans during a protest in front of the Syrian embassy in Amman, Jordan, Friday, Feb. 17. Mohammad Hannon/AP

What an exclusive club that represents: China, Russia, Iran and Venezuela. They, and a handful of others concerned about the exciting situation playing out in Syria had no interest in voting with the 137 members of the United Nations General Assembly to approve an Arab League resolution calling on President Bashar al-Assad to cease and desist.

China, Russia and Iran take umbrage at the text condemning "widespread and systematic violations of human rights" in Syria. For those three, Syria is a valued client; for China and Russia a purchaser of arms and for Iran a terror-supportive zombie-state. They would hastily sign such a text if the named aggressor of "widespread and systematic violations of human rights" would be represented as the Syrian National Council.

Sometimes those at the United Nations are simply unacceptably, unforgivably unobliging. Besides, China, Russia and Iran will not have it on their conscience to support al-Qaeda. And a vote of confidence for the Syrian National Council is a vote of trust for al-Qaeda. And the Muslim Brotherhood, they also. President al-Assad truly means it when he claims that terror groups are behind the uprising.

And he does, really and truly, mean to make Syrians happy by relaxing the state apparatus of oppressive laws. He loves Syria and he loves his people. And they, happily, reciprocate. It's just that, as in any country, there are malcontents and psychopaths whose only purpose is to stir up trouble and make life miserable for everyone.

The sanctimony and ill treatment that Syria has been exposed to of late is truly hurtful. Its ambassador to the United Nations, Bashar Jaafari, characterized the resolution as an unwarranted intervention in his country's internal affairs. Of course, of course it is. For Egypt's ambassador Maged Abdelaziz to say in the Assembly that there had been an "unacceptable" escalation of violence in Syria, is also unacceptable.

Ambassador Abdelaziz might wish to clarify that statement, and instruct his listeners what constitutes an "acceptable" escalation of violence. Using, for instance, Egypt's military response to its own uprising against the dictatorship of the ruling generals. But no mind, as in Syria with the Muslim Brotherhood hovering anxiously in the ascendancy, so too with Egypt.

"We demand that the Syrian government heed the demands of the Arab and Syrian people and staunch the bloodshed", sounds noble and high-minded. To which Syria's ambassador, snubbing his Egyptian counterpart, neatly responded, "Some of the co-sponsors would like to settle accounts with Syria."

So the siege continues, with the regime's encircling of Homs and Daraa and elsewhere, mopping up the opposition, entering villages to attack their residents, and under the assumption that they oppose the regime, entering their names on death's growing roster.