Giving Peace a Chance

The international community responded to George W. Bush's presidential invitation for a coalition to invade Afghanistan and rout the Taliban's totalitarian anti-humane rule in that country. The invasion resulted from the Taliban leader refusing to surrender his honoured al-Qaeda guests, primarily Osama bin Laden, to the demands of the United States. And so the Taliban was routed and al-Qaeda joined them in the mountains of the Hindu Kush, between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

And then the international community continued to rally behind the United States with its entry into Iraq, to invade and to remove the tyrant Saddam Hussein from power, though he had nothing whatever to do with the al-Qaeda malevolent presence and the attacks of September 11, 2001. This was war-lust, pure and simple. Which the Iraqis welcomed initially, then lapsed into a lunatic orgy of sectarian viciousness with Sunni death squads searching out Shiites, and Shia death squads entering Sunni enclaves and the slaughter was joined.

George W. Bush was widely condemned for his unneeded incursions into the Middle East, unleashing a firestorm of deadly violence, causing the deaths of tens of thousands of people, freed from the brutal restraints of a tyrant who at the very least kept them from one another's throats unless he himself wished to mount an atrocity. Which he mostly certainly indulged himself in from time to time, most famously in a chemical attack on Iraqi Kurds.

Now we've come full circle, in a sense. The 'war-monger' has departed. In his place is a Nobel Laureate, a man who has pledged himself to peace, to furthering the welfare of humankind through his deft and gentle touch, appealing to the better angels among us all, spurning the devils that lurk convincingly whispering of the messages of god. "The use of chemical weapons in Syria is not only a tragedy but also a violation of international law that must be addressed", stated President Barack Obama at the G20 summit in St.Petersburg.

President Barack Obama talks with UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon during the G20 summit. Photograph: Getty Images

 

No one appears to be listening. The power and the prestige of the superpower has faltered on the world stage. Other presidents have met their challenges and spurted their country to a multitude of conflicts. This president has sought to avoid all such events and stated that as his purpose. He speaks softly, eloquently, and offers an open hand of friendship. Perhaps reeling inwardly as that hand is smacked aside, his offers spurned by the very religion he hoped to convince America was no enemy to.

White House advisers explain that their president seeks "political and diplomatic" support from his international counterparts. He is not necessarily interested in drawing them into military cooperation. But then, nor are they interested in offering military cooperation, it has become abundantly clear by the phlegmatic reaction to this president's stated, then amended, re-stated, then revoked, intentions. Perhaps his allies are confused?

The type of action the United States is contemplating, explained President Obama's deputy national security adviser, "does not come with significant requirements of international participation", in which case no one should be disappointed when it is only France, Canada and Turkey that have sided themselves alongside the U.S. intention. And it is only France and Turkey presumably that will be adding military assistance to their diplomatic support, which Canada is offering.

The Kremlin took advantage of the full-stage attention conferred upon it with the mounting of the G20 summit, and announced its intention to increase its naval presence in the Mediterranean. To match, it appears, the presence of the United States' five destroyers on standby for a military strike. Initially, President Putin insisted that Russia would do nothing by stand by in disgust should the U.S. disgrace itself by offending international conventions.

Vladimir Putin has made no secret of his full support of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's position that it was the rebel side, the terrorists, who launched a precision military-type assault on a Damascus suburb of sleeping people with chemical weapons, killing well over a thousand, maiming thousands more. The Sunni terrorists, said the Shia Baathist leader, has sunk to new depths of depravity, and his government will not stand for it.

As for the European Union, its president, Herman Van Rompuy states that the August chemical attack "was a blatant violation of international law and a crime against humanity" requiring a political solution. "While respecting the recent calls for action, we underscore at the same time the need to move forward with addressing the Syrian crisis through the UN process", he declared. Splendid, old chap.

Though without sketching out the manner in which it proposes to move forward and how it will address the crisis. Waiting for the "UN process", will assuredly turn out to be a long wearisome period of frustrated waiting, during which time nothing of any substance will occur. During which time the Islamists representing the Iranian/Syrian/Hezbollah accord versus the jihadist/Islamists featuring al-Qaeda and Salafist factions may just decimate one another beyond recognition.

That, of course, is simply wistfully imaginative thinking.