Viet Nam Human Rights
Syrian conflict and competition among major powers
2/7/17
The political crisis
in Syria has lasted for more than 6 years and shown no signs of being ended. It
is believed that one of the main reasons for the issue is the fierce
geopolitical competition among major powers, first and foremost the U.S. and
Western countries vs Russia and China.
A focus for
geopolitical competition among major powers both inside and outside the region
Syria holds a position
of importance to the world’s modern politics. Economically, the country
possesses valuable natural resources and serves as the centre of the whole Arab
oil and gas pipeline of thousands of kilometres, not to mention its world-top oil
reserves in the Mediterranean Sea. Militarily, Syria’s coastline is the
potential place to build military ports and bases for the navies in the
Mediterranean Sea. Politically, Syria is an important ally of Russia and Iran
which have also been the focus of a no-less-intense geopolitical competition
for many years.
Occupying such an
important position, Syria has fallen into a spiral of geopolitical competition
at regional and global level. Regionally, Syria has become a centre that draws
5 countries, including Israel, Arab Saudi, Iran, Qatar and Turkey pursuing the
ambition to take the leadership role in the Middle East. While Iran, an ally of
Syria, manages to support it in the struggle to protect its territorial
integrity and national sovereignty, the rest advocate overthrowing President
Bashar al-Assad and making Damascus their ally against Iran. Globally, it is
the competition between the U.S., NATO, and its allied countries and Russia and
China. The two-level spiral has changed Syria’s crisis, which was initially
seen as a result of the “Arab Spring”, into a war of various forms. President
al-Assad ever stated that the crisis in Syria was not a civil war at all, and
that his country was fighting against a war on terror launched by “opposition
forces” in cooperation with terrorist organizations, economically, politically
and militarily supported by external major powers.
The US strategic
considerations in Syria’s conflict
It should be noted
that the US is now conducting a global geopolitical war to seize natural
resources, especially the fuel. In this regard, the war to gain control of oil
and gas in the Eurasia is taking place fiercely. The US effort to take control
of the world’s oil is intimately linked with the position of United Stated
Dollar (USD) as it is the only country in the world which guarantees the value
of its currency by the total of the world’s oil reserves, not by the total of
national assets like the others. Once the US loses control of the world’s oil
reserves, it will not be able to guarantee the value of the USD. Therefore, the
wars launched by the US after the end of the Cold War all resulted from its
ambition to take control of the world’s oil reserves with an important
geopolitical belt, namely Greater Middle East, stretching from Africa and
Middle East to Central Asia and South Asia, and political upheavals called
“Arab Spring” supported by the US aimed to implement this strategy. In this
strategy, Syria is among the top targets.
To overthrow President
al-Assad’s administration, the US has conducted a compound war with a close
combination of diplomatic, economic, political and military measures.
Diplomatically, the US has paid special attention to taking advantage of the
role of the United Nations Security Council and the United Nations General
Assembly to legalize the voice of the so-called “opposition forces” and
neutralize the political institution led by President al-Assad. Militarily, the
US has used “the opposition” to conduct a “proxy war”. It even planned to adopt
another version of Libya military intervention to Syria. However, due to
Russia’s support, the US could not terminate President al-Assad’s
administration. Alleging that “Syria’s Army used chemical weapons”, the US used
dozens of cruise missiles to attack Shayrat airbase of Syria in April 2017. It
is believed that the US is directly pursuing a dangerous military confrontation
with Russia and Damascus. That also proves that the competition for Syria
between the US and Russia has been more apparent and intense.
Russia’s strategy and
actions
Since the outbreak of
Syria’s crisis, Russia has resolutely defended the principle that no country
has the right to intervene in Syria’s internal affairs. According to analysts,
the reason is that a part from being a traditional ally of Syria, Russia is the
only country having a military base in Syrian port of Tartus. This is an
important foundation for Russia to extend its influence over the region and the
world. Thus, alongside the sponsorship of Damascus, Russia has to deal with
violations of international law against Syria, including several countries’
open support weapons to the “opposition” in Syria to dethrone the
constitutional and legitimate Government of Syria.
On September 30th
2015, in response to Syrian Government’s request and on the basis of the UN
Security Council’s Resolution on Syria, President Putin mounted a military
campaign against terrorism in this country, with the participation of Iran,
Iraq, Syria and some other forces to prevent the Government of Damascus from
collapsing.
China’s role in
Syria’s conflict
Generally, the role of
China in Syria’s conflict has not been clear. Understanding the complexity of
this conflict, China always holds its principle of staying out of the
confrontation. In reaction to political fluctuations of Syria, Beijing often
claims that they would not take side. However, basically, China would support
Russia in the issue of Syria. For instance, on August 28th 2013, Russia and
China vetoed a Draft Resolution of the UN Security Council proposed by the
United Kingdom on Syria; even on August 29th 2013, representatives of China and
Russia dropped out of the UN Security Council’s Meeting on Syria’s chemical
weapons. According to analysts, the reason for that reaction of Russia and
China was that the US and its allies crudely intervened in internal affairs of
Syria.
As for forces in the
conflict of Syria, China advocates negotiation with both the Government and the
“opposition”. This is a dual-use policy of Beijing. It clearly understands that
extremist Islamic forces fighting for the overthrow of President al-Assad will
not bring stability and development to Syria and the region; however, in case
these forces defeat the Government of Damascus, China will have to cooperate
with them to protect its benefits in “post-al-Assad” period.
To conclude, the
conflict in Syria results from both internal disagreement and fierce
competition among major powers, particularly the US, the West, and Russia,
China. To bring it to an end, there should be cooperation among countries, with
a respect for international law and national sovereignty of Syria.
Popular Posts
-
Religion is a part of the spiritual life in society, this phenomenon of the superstructure has been strongly changed with economic - social... -
Vietnam has just done well for the second cycle of Universal Periodical Review (UPR) in Geneva, Switzerland. So, what’s the UPR? an... -
Thai people in Shutdown Bangkok protests Not until this crisis, we have realized the ne... -
Representatives from foreign countries congratulate Viet Nam on its election to the Human Rights Council for the first time on November ... -
A street flowers vendor in Hanoi Another new spring has come to Vietnam, bring... -
If nothing changes, there will be a preferential credit program with hundreds of thousands billion of capital for agriculture and r... -
Recently, several anti-governmental individuals have established series of illegal groups and organizations in the name of civil soci... -
Radio Free Asia (RFA) is a private, nonprofit international broadcasting agency of the United States government that broadcasts and...
All comments [ 10 ]
With the Security Council – and the EU – divided over Syria, the responsibility falls on individual states to end the indiscriminate attacks and protect civilians.
Syrians, can’t commemorate the day the international community declared that everyone deserved life, liberty, and security, because we have no human rights to celebrate when we are deprived of the right to live.
In the process, many Syrians have come to believe that the international community has given up on Syria.
Remarkably few still believe there are ways to change the situation and bring back our human rights.
International Humanitarian Law is equally clear that the Security Council is not the only vehicle for action.
Now, they must themselves stand up for the people of Syria – as individual countries, through other international processes and via multilateral organisations like the European Union.
But ultimately, Syrians need more than humanitarian aid: they also need protection, which member states can give them by stopping the main killer of civilians in Syria.
The international community can also stand up for the Syrian people in the UN General Assembly.
Some states have called for an emergency session on Syria at the General Assembly to unlock the impasse in the Security Council.
All of these options are available to the international community as a collective or as individual member states. The world can indeed stand up for Syrians and help renew the pledge that all humans deserve the universal rights of life, liberty, and safety.
Your comments