Calls to Prevent US Strike on Syria Fall on Deaf Ears

Elio Delgado Legon

Bashar al-Assad and Raúl Castro. File photo.

HAVANA TIMES — US President Barack Obama’s intentions of launching a “limited strike” on Syria – a measure for which he has sought authorization from Congress – have prompted innumerable negative reactions around the world and no few statements from respected civilian and military personalities who do not wish these threats to be carried out.

A survey conducted by The Washington Post and ABC reveals that six out of every ten Americans are opposed to this offensive.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has stated that a military attack on Syria could worsen the conflict, adding that: “We must consider the impact that any punitive measure would have on efforts to prevent further bloodshed and facilitate a political solution to the conflict.”

Before more than one hundred thousand people gathered in Saint Peter Square, Pope Francisco declared that wars always spell defeat for humanity, and strongly urged leaders around the war to abandon the idea of such a conflict. Prior to this, he had taken a number of steps in this direction and sent a letter to the leaders of the Group of 20, advocating peace.

Other world leaders, such as Russian President Vladimir Putin, have said that claims that the Syrian army has used chemical weapons are absurd, when they are well aware of the fact that such statements could be used as a pretext for sanctions and even a military intervention. It’s a ridiculous claim devoid of any logic, he said.

The Russian president told Obama that, before thinking of using military force against Syria, they ought to consider the victims of such an intervention, adding that he addressed the US president in his capacity as a Nobel Peace Prize laureate.

Other European leaders have distanced themselves from such calls for a strike on Syria, a measure which, without a Security Council mandate, constitutes a violation of international law and the UN Charter.

Many international political analysts have come out against a military attack on Syria, justified by the claim that the government used chemical weapons against its own people, something which has not and cannot be proven.

There is, however, evidence that such chemical weapons were used by mercenary forces, which declared as much when asked by a journalist investigating the facts. These forces admitted they were never taught how to make proper use of these weapons and that this was the reason the explosion took place.

In addition, there have been reports that a video showing the use of chemical weapons in Syria was actually filmed in a big film studio in Qatar. Several US broadcasters, including CNN and NBC, have declared they cannot guarantee the authenticity of the video showing the chemical attack in Syria.

As a last minute resort, the Russian government advanced a proposal calling for Syria to place its chemical weapons at the disposal of the international community, to show it has no intentions of using them in an internal conflict. This proposal has been accepted by the Syrian government.

This deprived the US president of all arguments and Congress is to discuss the issue. Barack Obama, however, maintains an ambiguous stance on the matter and has not yet declared whether he agrees with the measure proposed by Russia. He is to meet with President Putin to assess the matter.

Despite massive opposition and so many other calls not to carry out the strike it would be impossible to quote them all, President Obama has not officially discarded the possibility of a limited strike against Syria, aimed at weakening its military force. Such a measure would aid the mercenaries and, in the words of Secretary of State John Kerry, would constitute a clear message to Iran.

It is more than clear that, since mercenaries armed and trained by the CIA and Gulf countries were introduced into the region, the aim of this entire maneuver has been to overthrow Bashar al-Assad’s government and continue to fence Iran in.

Many experts concur that an intervention in Syria could unleash a conflict of incalculable repercussions which would spread across the entire Middle East – a region which is already volatile.

All of these opinions and many others have reached the ears of Barack Obama, but he doesn’t seem to be paying much attention, as though deaf. We can only hope he will abandon the idea of invading Syria, for the benefit of world peace.

Elio Delgado Legon

Elio Delgado-Legon: I am a Cuban who has lived for 80 years, therefore I know full well how life was before the revolution, having experienced it directly and indirectly. As a result, it hurts me to read so many aspersions cast upon a government that fights tooth and nail to provide us a better life. If it hasn’t fully been able to do so, this is because of the many obstacles that have been put in its way.

5 thoughts on “Calls to Prevent US Strike on Syria Fall on Deaf Ears

  • The UN has found: “On the basis of the evidence obtained during the investigation of the Ghouta incident, the conclusion is that chemical weapons have been used in the ongoing conflict between the parties in the Syrian Arab Republic, also against civilians, including children, on a relatively large scale,” said the report by chief U.N. investigator Ake Sellstrom of Sweden.

    “In particular, the environmental, chemical and medical samples we have collected provide clear and convincing evidence that surface-to-surface rockets containing the nerve agent sarin were used,” it said. …further more trajectories and composition off the shells as well as electronic intercepts of government forces indicate that the Syrian government was most likely responsible. No filming in a sound studio Elio.

  • Elio, Obama specifically declared the US would not invade Syria. Do you even understand the difference between a missile strike and a boots-on-the-ground invasion? No matter, neither will happen now.

    Obama’s confused and amateurish foreign policy team has been tied in knots by Putin. Assad is safe now to slaughter the Syrian people with his Russian supplied weapons. Assad agreed to allow an international team remove his chemical weapons some time next year. His agreement is a tacit admission that he did indeed use chemical weapons already, as he would never have agreed to give them up of he honestly believed the rebels have chemical weapons of their own.

  • Elio do you make this stuff up as you go along? You do realize hat the rest of he world, outside Cuba, has access to news and information. That there is not much stomach for military intervention in Syria is not in doubt, that the world realizes that Syria is equally responsible for the use of these weapons is also not in doubt.

    At least I had a laugh reading your claims about some type of video being filmed in Qatar.

  • I am impressed that Elio knows with such certainty what President Obama is gong to do. Especially when no one else knows.

  • Elio, your post is both factually incorrect and reads as if written by a 12-year old. The facts overwhelmingly support the allegation that Assad’s army was responsible for the chemical attacks. Incriminating evidence including missile trajectories believed to have delivered the chemical weapons leaving government-controlled territories, telephone intercepts and Syrian army troop movements support these allegations. It would appear that it is convenient for you to believe otherwise regardless of the facts. Obama done just about everything he possibly can to avoid a military strike. The ball would appear to be in Syria’s court at this point. Allow an international force to locate and secure all chemical weapons in Syrian control in a timely fashion or face the consequences. Not a bad deal considering….

Comments are closed.