'Twas a famous victory!

December 31, 2018 - added: - Well it seems as if Assad has really won this time! But at what cost in human lives and materiel? With the Americans deciding to pull out of Syria and Iraq, this gives free reign to Assad's allies, Iran and and Russia. Good luck to the Kurds and any others in opposition to Assad, still in Syria! Assad will have a field day with any opposition still in the country.

If you thought his father, Hafez al-Assad was bad - who killed 20 000 opposition countrymen and women - I'm thinkin you ain't seen nothing yet! Son of Hafez, one Bashar al-Assad, has presided over at least 200 000 deaths, millions displaced and the cities and infrastructure destroyed. Now there is no one to stop him!

And in spite of various claims to the contrary, ISIS, that murderous fundamentalist Islamic group has not been defeated or destroyed. Weakened? Yes. Destroyed? No.

March, 15. 2018 - added:- According to the latest news with the assistance of both Russia and Iran the "rebels" who have been fighting to free Syria from the murderous regime or Bashar al-Assad have been all but driven out of Syria. Likewise the ISIS, at least what is left of them have also, more or less, been defeated. So, shortly, there will be proud proclamations that Syria is free!

The trouble will be rebuilding a shattered country. Aleppo - formerly a large thriving city - is now absolutely devastated. And there are many similar situations. And what about the people - homeless, injured, refugees in their own country?

This will be no "victory"; this will be an example of brute force applied indiscriminately to prove a point.

Sept, 15. 2017  - added:- According to the latest news what I have written below is coming to pass. The Russians are now in control of much of what was ISIS controlled Syria. So be it.

I wonder at the “victory” the Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad will inherit after his "civil war" is over. He will win but he does not have the ability to do it his own.

With Russian help he will win. But at what cost?

What I fear is that what was a country with an ancient history – stretching back thousands of years – I fear it will be in ruins. My concern is what will remain after the “victory”?

Cities devastated; infrastructure in ruins; half the population (about 12 million out of a total of about 24 million people) either dead, injured, displaced or homeless. For what? So Bashar al-Assad can claim “victory” and satisfy his ego and support the legacy of his megalomaniac father?

As my one loyal reader knows I like poetry. Now there is a poem by Robert Southey (1774-1843) called “After Blenheim”, which satirizes the concept of “victory”, which I believe is very appropriate in this situation. I won’t burden my reader with the whole poem – just the last three verses. They will give some idea of the gist:-

…..

‘They say it was a shocking sight

            After the field was won;

For many a thousand bodies here

            Lay rotting in the sun;

But things like that, you know, must be

After a famous victory.’

‘Great praise for the Duke of Marlboro’ won

            And our good Prince Eugene.’

“Why ‘twas a very wicked thing!”

            Said little Willelmine;

“Nay …. Nay … my little girl”, quoth he,

“It was a famous victory.”

‘And everybody praised the Duke

            Who this great fight did win.’

“But what good came of it at last?”

            Quoth little Peterkin:-

‘Why that I cannot tell,’ said he,

‘But ‘twas a famous victory.’

As always in war it is the innocent, the women and children, who suffer the most.

What a "famous victory" Bashar al-Assad will have won!

Syria and Iraq - Back off and let them be!

Just imagine for a moment, if you can, what Mississippi Governor Bill Bryant (Republican) would say, or feel, if someone in Egypt or Saudi Arabia said that the current method of governance in that state was all wrong (constant bickering between Republican and Democratic parties and with strong racist tendencies) and they should institute a system, instead, based on the Koran.  

Furthermore, that both Egypt and Saudi Arabia would be prepared to support and finance any group who agreed with their views and which was prepared to challenge the current regime in Mississippi. And how would he feel if they strongly suggested, that he, Governor Bryant should be replaced, by force if necessary, as he was not acting in the interests of peace in the USA.

Apoplectic would be a mild description, I suggest!

Yet this (in reverse) is what the USA and their allies are suggesting for both Syria and Iraq. Now I might not have agreed with either the late Saddam Hussein (or the current regime of Nouri al-Mliki) or with Bashar al-Assad (or with the avowed policies of the brutal ISIS leadership) and their oppressive policies and yet both Iraq and Syria, before the current conflicts, were relatively stable and prosperous countries.

Contrast this with what is happening in those two countries now – today.

They are neither stable nor prosperous. And what disturbs me most is that we (the “West”) played a major part in destabilising both these countries. To what end? Hundreds of thousands dead, millions displaced, their economies in tatters and the prospects of any peaceful result is far distant.

Again, what disturbs me is that we (the West – America and others including Australia) were influential – if not the actual cause, of the problems that beset both Iraq and Syria. This was the nominally Christian “West” trying to change the politics and pick a winner in these two unfortunate countries, both Muslim. Both are now in the grip of extremists, which is what, I suggest, the “West” was trying to avoid in the first place!

Why can’t we – “the West” – learn the leave well alone and back off? How others govern themselves is no concern of ours; just as how we govern ourselves is no concern of others. As long as whatever conflicts they may experience are kept within their borders, let them be. Both geographic areas, now called Syria and Iraq, have tumultuous pasts going back to the beginning of recorded history and yet both have survived. Both Syrians and Iraqis are intelligent people, perfectly capable of working out their own destinies.

I am not a Muslim. But I think I have enough common sense to avoid trying to pick a winner when it comes to Sunni versus Shia in Iraq or Syria – or to try a pick what method of governance they would prefer or choose or what some non-Muslim may consider would be “best for them”.

Learn not to interfere where we are not wanted! Back off and let them be!!

Now it is Assad for Syria – what if …?

Recent reports in the media indicate that analysts now consider the best option for Syria (and for stability in the Middle East) is if Assad regains control of Syria. Well now – isn’t that good news!

Ooops! Sorry we made a mistake!

I have said before (as my one loyal reader has pointed out) the Syrians are an intelligent people with a very long, if rather turbulent, history going back millennia. As I also pointed out it is very poor policy to try and pick winners when it comes to any country’s governance, but particularly in the Middle East. And then what about the one hundred thousand (and counting) Syrian casualties later?

For the sake of humanity and in the name of whatever you consider God to be, leave Syria to the Syrians and back off!

And now there is Afghanistan. The Afghanis are an intelligent people with a very long, if rather turbulent, history going back millennia. They have fought off invaders ranging from Alexander the Great to Genghis Khan to the more recent Soviet invasion and prevailed. Once more – trying to pick winners in this area of the world is an impossible, and pointless task.

In their recent history the Afghanis have lost many uncounted thousands of civilian casualties to the Taliban, the Soviets and NATO (read USA) actions. More importantly are the people any better off with NATO interference? 

The Afghanis are capable of sorting themselves out, one way or another. Just leave them alone. Back off!

Will this be another “Ooops” moment? You bet.

Now, just for a moment let us speculate. What would have happened if former President G W Bush and his cronies had come to a similar conclusion about Iraq? Maybe, just maybe, Iraq (and stability in the Middle East) would have been better off under Saddam Hussein. As afore mentioned, it is very poor policy to try and pick winners when it comes to any country’s governance, but particularly in the Middle East. And particularly for the five hundred thousand plus (and counting) Iraqi (and US and allied) casualties later.

Just like the Syrians and Afghanis, the Iraqis are an intelligent people with a very long, if rather turbulent, history going back millennia. Mesopotamia – the Land between the Two Rivers – was the cradle of civilization and extends at least as far back as recorded history, to about 3000 BC (remember the Babylonians?).

Ooops! Sorry we made a mistake! But was the mistake about the Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) or was the mistake about invading Iraq in the first place?

Or maybe both? Why can’t we (that is the USA and the West) just leave well alone and back off?

Not again. Please!

Oh dear, Oh dearie me! Here we go again. More interference in another country; more mayhem; more misery; more deaths; more displaced people; more refugees. And for what? Pray tell! Pray explain!

Syria!

We are, once more, hearing the rattle of sabres. We are, once more, hearing the “Ka Ching” sound from the armament industries around the world as they work out how much money they will make from a possible (probable?) foreign engagement in the internal affairs of the Syrians.

While I will admit that the Assad regime may be not to my liking or, as is evident, to that of the “West”, so what! It is certainly apparent that poison gas was used by someone in Syria (and this is not the first time such an atrocity has been committed in the Middle East) but I do not believe that it is up to anyone else except the Syrians to sort out Syria’s problems. Any intervention in Syria raised the spectre of imponderable and unintended consequences.

Just remember the – I am sure – unintended consequences of granting part of the land of Palestine to Israel. The results of which are still being played out – some sixty thousand dead and counting.

Just remember the – I am sure – unintended consequences of the intervention in Vietnam and the shocking effects of Agent Orange on the population, which is still being played out. This was poison on a grand scale.

Just remember the – I am sure – unintended consequences of the intervention in Iraq and the chaos that resulted and which has yet to play out. At least one hundred and sixty thousand dead, and counting.

Leave Syria alone. Let the Syrian’s work through their problems – I repeat their problems – and learn to accept whatever result eventuates, good, bad or indifferent. They started it, let them finish it. The Syrians are an intelligent and capable people. They have had problems going back thousands of years and they have sorted themselves out – one way or another. They have survived as has the rest of the world – no matter who governs Syria.

Provide humanitarian aid when it is requested by anyone. Certainly! But not arms or armed intervention no matter who requests it.

LEAVE SYRIA ALONE, IT IS NOT OUR PROBLEM.

Syria – don’t add fuel to the fire!

It is a very dangerous course of action to try a pick a winner in a war zone. Particularly in a civil war and even more dangerous when to opposing sides are divided by religious beliefs.

I am not a Syrian, I have never knowingly met a Syrian – nor am I a Muslim. I strongly believe that no person, group or country that is neither Muslim nor Syrian should interfere in Syria. Bashar al-Assad may not be a very nice person – but look at who his father was and look at what his father did to the Syrian people many years ago. He killed thousands. So his son, the current Syrian president, has not had a particularly good role model to emulate.

The Syrians started this “war” two years ago (Amended Feb 22, 2018:- actually started March 15, 2011, so now seven years ago) and while I am appalled at the violence and the escalation into neighbouring countries I strongly disagree with any attempt to “support” any of the warring parties by supplying them with weapons. The Russians are wrong; the EU is wrong and the Americans are wrong in offering support to either side – in other words trying to pick a winner. (Added Feb 22, 2018:- Also  don't forget the religious side of this war Shia - the Alawite ruling minority and Shia majority in Iran vs the Sunni majority opposition allied to the Turks and others in the region).

Picking winners in a civil conflict never works. The Russians and the Western Coalition tried it in Afghanistan; the French and the Americans (and allies) tried it in Vietnam; the Americans and their allies tried it in Iraq and there are many other examples to draw on (Palestine?) – history is littered with such attempts - all failed or are failing. The Americans themselves should know better than to interfere in someone else’s civil war – each side resisted interference from the French and/or British in their various "home grown" conflicts hundreds of years ago.

Now the Russians are ramping up their supply of weapons to Syria. This will inevitably be matched by the “West” and by Israel. To what end? Such actions will just add fuel to the fire. This Syrian civil conflict – as in all such conflicts - has its origins in injustice (Palestine?). And injustice can never resolved by violence. Violence just creates more injustice, as we have already witnessed, this in turn will promote more violence to “redress” the additional injustices and so a vortex of violence and injustice will ensue. No one benefits – except arms dealers and weapons manufacturers and suppliers.

By all means provide humanitarian aid to the millions of Syrian refugees in Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey and to support these countries in their efforts to assist the refugees  - this is  fair and just. But not to supply weapons.

Violence is the last resort of the morally bankrupt.   

New Beginings

While recently moving house and “binning” unwanted stuff I came across an old wallet of mine in the back of a drawer. I checked to see if I had left anything in it – there was nothing except a fortune cookie from some long forgotten Christmas past. It read as follows:-

“You will enjoy good health – that will be your form of wealth”.

I was rather taken aback at having this thrown in my face, as it were. It is true that I am fortunate in that I do enjoy good health and I certainly appreciate the fact that no amount of money can “buy” good health but I was surprised to have this presented to me in this manner. It was the last thing I expected but then Nature, at the time and place of its choosing, has its own way of reminding us of important facts.

This last fact – that Nature has its own way of presenting things - led me to reflect on what Al Ghazali said (he was a Muslim jurist, theologian and mystic born in Iran and who lived 1058-1111 CE) - we can learn from everyone!!:

“Punishment is the natural working out of consequences, and not an arbitrary infliction imposed ab extra.”

From this statement, by a somewhat circuitous route, I arrived at a point where I was thinking about current events in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria (Al Ghazali spent some time in Damascus). If punishment is the result of consequences - the natural flow of events from cause to effect - then the suffering being experienced by the peoples of Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria (and by extension many of the Allied military) would be, logically, the result of some previous circumstance or circumstances (the cause).

If we examine Afghanistan for example we find that, certainly in recent times, they have had the beliefs and wishes of others imposed on them – first the Russians and now the Americans and their allies.

The Russian incursion into Afghanistan lasted nine years from December 1979 to February 1989. As part of the Cold War (the West vs Soviet Russia) the conflict between Soviet led Afghan troops fighting multi-national insurgent groups (predominantly Muslim but US aided) known as the mujahideen was very violent.

The mujahideen won and the Russians were forced out in 1989.

Now for the Americans and their allies (including Australia) the Taliban are the “enemy” in Afghanistan – but both the mujahedeen and the Taliban had their origins in the original Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and are indirect creations of the US from their attempts to weaken the Soviets during the Cold War.

Also, indirectly, it has been alleged that the early foundations of al-Qaeda stem, at least in part, from the relationships, the weaponry and the billions in US aid that was given to support the mujahedeen in their fight to expel the Soviets.

The Afghan people are a tough and independent lot – they resent any incursion by anyone.

What goes around comes around!

Then there is Iraq. I know the Saddam Hussein was a very unpleasant character but he unified and modernised Iraqi society and facilitated the education of millions of Iraqis (both male and female) to such an extent that he was even given an award by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Everything worked, people had food, employment and a level of social services that were unprecedented among Middle Eastern countries in what was an (admittedly enforced) secular country.

Now it is a disaster. Iraq is a mess of sectarian violence. Tens of thousands of Iraqis died as did thousands of Americans and their allies in the invasion of that country. For what? Bombs and general shootings are still killing hundreds of these unfortunate people. And to make matters worse previously reliable electricity and water services are now somewhat problematic and the previously excellent social services are virtually non-existent and there is high unemployment. Also it is not a “Democracy” such as would be approved by the “West”.

Syria is something else again. The current civil war (upward of 40 000 have died and millions have fled their homes) appears to be an extension of the “Arab spring” movement but would seem to have been high-jacked by the “Muslim Brotherhood” which had its origins in Egypt and others apparently affiliated to Muslim extremists and al-Qaeda.

All indications are that Syria will end up as a fragmented failed state despite the efforts of other Arab countries and the “West” who are desperately trying to prevent this.

America and the West cannot hope to impose anything resembling the Western Ideal of Democracy in the Middle East if the peoples concerned are not prepared to embrace it. If they do embrace Democracy it may be a version, a local somewhat altered version, a cherry-picked version. It will be, however, what they choose. Let it be – it will be a “grass roots” from the bottom up movement to allow the local populace a voice in running their country.  It cannot and will not be something imposed by outsiders (and non-Muslims at that).

The West, by trying to interfere in the internal affairs of these countries (something the West would never accept if the roles were reversed) has started a sequence of events that it has no power to control. If the West does not like the results – the consequences – of its interference then the West must look to itself.

As Al-Ghazali said (see my quote above) “Punishment is the natural working out of consequences, and not an arbitrary infliction imposed ab extra.”

The Arabs are not children. They will sort themselves out.  They are an intelligent people some of whom have been caught up in a quasi-religious, quasi-political ideology and, combined with a distorted view of history, are trying to impose their views and to recreate a long lost “golden age” of Arab achievement to match the West. Their “power” comes from a strict interpretation of the Koran and  application of their version of Islamic Law.

Let them be. Leave well alone. The West must learn to take responsibility for, and accept the consequences, of its actions (good or bad).

Remember what goes around comes around!