Syria - What should we do if anything?

[Tonci87]

And of course, Iran, Lebanon, Saoudi Arabia, Quatar, Russia and China aren't responsible for anything anytime.

Oh sorry, did I hurt your national feelings?
Of course those other countries are responsible for many bad things that happened, but Syria was under french control, like many other arab or african nations, and the french imperialism was most certainly a very bad thing.

[ProfTournesol]

Of course those other countries are responsible for many bad things that happened, but Syria was under french control, like many other arab or african nations, and the french imperialism was most certainly a very bad thing.

True, but take a parallel with something you know well : Yougoslavia. It was created after WW1 by the winners (France included), with the same kind of ethnic and religious troubles as we can see in Syria now. Is it responsible for what happened in the 90's ?

[PELHAM]

The current regime/family dynasty in Syria was and is supported by the Soviet Union/Russia, trying to point the finger at French imperialism as the problem behind all this is rather narrow - there are all kinds of reasons including the arbitrary map drawing. Eg Russia is the manufacturer of the landmines (PMN-2, it's written on the side) recently planted along Syria's borders to prevent refugees leaving the country. Many civilians are killed and injured each day by this indescriminate weapon. Local farmers were simply told not to enter orchards without permission, they were given no clear warning of the hazard:

[gammadust]

Some arbitrary Map drawings:

MAP #2
JUNE 2006 - Blood borders

Credits: 2006 - Ralph Peters

[Nearly 100 percent of Iraq’s Kurds would vote for independence] As would the long-suffering Kurds of Turkey, who have endured decades of violent military oppression and a decades-long demotion to 'mountain Turks' in an effort to eradicate their identity. While the Kurdish plight at Ankara's hands has eased somewhat over the past decade, the repression recently intensified again and the eastern fifth of Turkey should be viewed as occupied territory. As for the Kurds of Syria and Iran, they, too, would rush to join an independent Kurdistan if they could.

Ralph Peters (AFJ)

Spoiler:

show spoiler

JULY 2006 - New Middle East's Birth Pangs

what we're seeing here [destruction of Lebanon and the Israeli attacks on Lebanon - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lo..._fact_box.jpg], in a sense, is the growing — the 'birth pangs' — of a 'New Middle East' and whatever we do we [United States] have to be certain that we’re pushing forward to the New Middle East [and] not going back to the old one.

Secretary Condoleezza Rice (Slate)

SEPTEMBER 2006 - Carved-up Map of Turkey at NATO Prompts US Apology

A map prepared by a retired U.S. military officer that sketches Turkey as a partitioned country was presented at the NATO’s Defense College in Rome, where Turkish officers attend.
The use of the map at a conference meeting by a colonel from the U.S. National War Academy angered Turkish military officers.
(...)
The U.S. State Department assured Ankara that the map did not reflect the official American view, and denounced it as unacceptable.
(Today's Zaman)

MAP #1
Arc of Crisis

Credits: 1992? - Bernard Lewis of "Clash of Civilizations" fame

Spoiler:

show spoiler

MARCH 1992 - Rethinking the Middle East

[Alternative to the future direction of Middle East societies] which could even be precipitated by fundamentalism, is what has of late become fashionable to call 'Lebanonization'. Most of the states of the Middle East - Egypt is an obvious exception - are of recent and artificial construction and are vulnerable to such a process. If the central power is sufficiently weakened, there is no real civil society to hold the polity together, no real sense of common national identity or overriding allegiance to the nation-state. The state then disintegrates - as happened in Lebanon - into a chaos of squabbling, feuding, fighting sects, tribes, regions and parties." (page 24)

Bernard Lewis (The Henry M. Jackson Memorial Lecture)

[Eble]

landmines are not banned what gives you that impression, the US/Russia and Syria and quite a few other countries never signed the treaty, no difference between these and cluster bombs.

That mine was supposed to be in the ground just 15 days? looks older than that, no proof in this video, just some randoms talking.

[PELHAM]

landmines are not banned what gives you that impression, the US/Russia and Syria and quite a few other countries never signed the treaty, no difference between these and cluster bombs.
That mine was supposed to be in the ground just 15 days? looks older than that, no proof in this video, just some randoms talking.

I know they are not banned that's just a silly video title that some idiot put on afterwards, HRW likes to bitch about mines as they kill so many civilians. Listen to what the guy says and that's a genuine new mine - plastics still shiny, if it had been in the ground over winter it would look different.

[oxmox]

Around 160 countries did sign the Ottawa Treaty in which it is determined that landmines are banned. The USA aswell Poland are the only NATO countries who did not sign it as far i know.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ot...ty_members.svg

True, but take a parallel with something you know well : Yougoslavia. It was created after WW1 by the winners (France included), with the same kind of ethnic and religious troubles as we can see in Syria now. Is it responsible for what happened in the 90's ?

Yougoslavia was a man-made multi ethnic nation and only the Tito Regime with its iron rule could hold the people together. After the fall of communism all these different types of people tried to split up and got confronted with the Yougoslavia Wars in the 90ies and the individual interests, it was a conflict based on ethnic, religious and economical issues. And the Balkans before Yougoslavia was always a place with many conflicts anyway.

At the end in many countries and areas with heavy influence from foreign Powers and without any consideration of the ethnics or religion problems did arise.

[maturin]

Yugoslavia was a man-made multi ethnic nation and only the Tito Regime with its iron rule could hold the people together.

Yugoslavia fell apart because of a fascist invasion. The country was created with the power of Western states, but on behalf of a strong Yugoslav nationalist movement that dated back to the early 19th century.

There is no essential difference between Yugoslavia and Belgium. Both are equally 'artificial' and 'doomed.' It suits the biases of condescending Westerners (whose governments played a cheerleading role in the breakup of the country) to view it as inevitable.

Yugoslav nationalism was an idea that failed to be completed, not an idea that never had a chance. The country's history of violence wasn't insurmountable; WWII was the poison pill, and the Communists were unable to heal the wounds. Even they had a shot, though.

And slightly back on-topic, the idea that the Middle East's borders can be adjusted to rationally match ethnic and religious lines is a dangerous fantasy. No borders really can, except maybe in Australia. The only answer is pluralism, federalism and political nationalism.

[gammadust]

some updates:

U.S. intelligence indicates that a Turkish warplane shot down by Syrian forces was most likely hit by shore-based antiaircraft guns while it was inside Syrian airspace, American officials said, a finding in tune with Syria's account and at odds with Turkey.
WSJ

Spoiler:

show spoiler

lending some credit to the earlier video while corroborating Syria's Foreign Minister version of the incident:

Global powers agreed on Saturday to back a plan for political transition in Syria that did not include a specific call for President Bashar al-Assad to step down.
NYT

Action Group for Syria Final Communique 06/30/2012

Syria's main opposition groups rejected on Sunday a new international plan that calls for a transitional government because the compromise agreement did not bar President Bashar Assad from participating.
AP

[Iroquois Pliskin]

Oh, come on Gamma -- we'll partition Syria along with those other nincompoop "states" and form new ones as needed with respect to ethnic minorities; refer to the fall of USSR. You, as am I, are observing this from the comfort of liberal Europe, or shall I say "Liberated" from the irrationalities of religious persecutions, nationalism, racism of the XX century.

Europe has arrived at the point it is today only through two World Wars, and so it goes: Middle East must also pass through its own cultural "transformation", that will spark the Fire in the Minds of Men, even if it does mean war.

P.S. QF-4 @ Turkey's folly.

---------- Post added at 00:01 ---------- Previous post was at 23:55 ----------

And slightly back on-topic, the idea that the Middle East's borders can be adjusted to rationally match ethnic and religious lines is a dangerous fantasy. No borders really can, except maybe in Australia. The only answer is pluralism, federalism and political nationalism.

This solution would apply to a selection of rational, "liberal" states steeped in pluralism and tolerance, but it is obviously not the case in the Middle East at the moment. For European Union to be born, we had to go through half a century of warfare, followed by dissolution of an irrational system - the USSR.

A Federation is a crown achievement, not to be bestowed lightly upon the ignorant masses.