OnlineColumnist®.com: Putin Punishes Georgia

HOME • ARTICLES • BOOKS • THE TEFLON REPORT • REACTIONS • ABOUT DISCOBOLOS

U.N. Sends Truce Monitors into Syria

by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Sending observers into war-ravaged Syria, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon hopes to reinforce Ghana-born former Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s ceasefire plan, designed to stop Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s bloody crackdown. Placing 300 blue-helmeted, bulletproof-vested U.N. observers in the bullet-ridden streets of Homs, the U.N. hopes to force Assad into making concessions to opposition groups. U.N. officials had accused Assad of violating the delicate ceasefire designed to stop a bloody crackdown, causing thousands of civilian deaths since the uprising began March 15, 2011, only a few months after pro-democracy Tunisian revolution toppled the long-time government of President Zine El Abedine Ben Ali Oct. 23, 2010. Only a few months later, in what’s become known as the “Arab Spring,” Egypt’s authoritarian but pro-Western 30-year rule of Hosni Mubarak came to an end Feb. 11, 2011.

When long-time Libyan strongman Muammar Gaddafi was driven from Tripoli Aug. 24, 2011, it spelled trouble for the 46-year-old Assad, whose Alawite Shiite minority clings to power in an overwhelmingly Sunni country. Assad knows that, without ruling by consensus, his tenuous grip on power weakens daily with ongoing street protests. Despite ties to Lebanon’s Islamic Hezbollah faction, Assad has received little support from its chief backer, Iran. Iran’s Shiite mullahs have stayed out of Syria’s uprising that could eventually topple Assad’s fellow Shiite regime. Placing U.N. observers around Syria makes Assad’s job all the more difficult. U.N. chief Ban blasted Assad for violating Annan’s peace mission. Insisting, “the gross violations of the fundamental rights of the Syrian people must stop at once,” Ban ignored Assad’s problems with a growing Sunni uprising.

Since liberated from France in 1946, Syria has been a tightly controlled authoritarian regime, eventually taken over by Bashar’s father, Haffez al-Assad in 1971. Assad’s small Shiite minority only accounts for 10% of the population, largely dominated by a pro-Islamic Sunni majority. Assad’s problems, whether admitted to or not by the U.N., stem from trying to control Syria’s Sunni population, seizing upon recent power grabs in other Arab countries. Egypt’s current dilemma stems directly from fundamentalist groups, largely headed by the Islamic Brotherhood, now controlling Egyptian politics. Assad knows that his Alawite sect is on the verge of extinction at the hands of a hostile Sunni majority. Deploying 300 U.N. observers make Assad’s job of halting the current uprising more difficult. U.N. officials don’t really get what’s at stake in Syria: Preventing a Wahhabi takeover of another Arab country.

Unlike Assad’s Alawite sect, Wahhabists believe in strict Sharia law, turning back the clock, especially for the role of women in Islamic societies. U.N. intervention in Syria aims at halting the bloodshed but doesn’t get the big picture of how Islamic extremism has turned the Middle East into the world’s terrorist breeding ground. If the lessons of Sept. 11 count for anything, it’s the recognition that Islamic extremism poses implacable dangers to the civilized world. Without realizing the quicksand, the U.N. finds itself caught in the sticky wicket of battling Islamic extremism. Morphed from Operation Enduring Freedom’s original mission to get Sept. 11 mastermind Osama bin Laden, today’s Afghan War attempts to hold the line against the Taliban’s brand of Islamic extremism. Like the U.S.-backed Karzai government in Afghanistan, Assad finds himself battling Islamic extremists.

Now that Egypt, Libya and now Syria face popular Islamic movements, it’s more difficult for pro-Western governments to advance agendas in the Middle East. It’s no accident that Russia and China back Assad’s Syria, opposing moves in the U.N. Security Council to bully Syria into making concessions with Islamic extremists. While opposition groups talk a good game, like they did in Egypt and Libya, the fact remains they want fundamentalist Sharia law to replace pro-Western authoritative regimes. Syria’s U.N. ambassador Bashar Ja’afari reassured the Security Council that Assad was withdrawing heavy armaments from besieged Syrian cities. “Let there be no doubt. We, our allies and others in this body are planning and preparing for those actions that will be required of all of us if the Assad regime persists in the slaughter of Syrian people,” said U.S. U.N. ambassador Susan Rice.

Before the U.N. and U.S. inadvertently add to current Mideast chaos, they need to carefully evaluate the consequences of regime change in Syria. Russia and China see that tossing Assad under the bus helps no one in the Middle East, certainly not stable foreign business investment. If the shoe were on the other foot and the U.S. or Europe faced popular extremist uprisings, would they want their allies in the U.N. to back opposition groups? No matter how unseemly Assad, sovereign regimes have the right to defend themselves against enemies, both foreign and domestic. Former President George W. Bush saw firsthand what happened in 2006 when he backed free elections in Gaza: The people voted for Hamas, a State Dept. recognized terror group. Before selling Assad down the river, the U.N. and U.S. better know that his replacement won’t add to the Mideast’s growing chaos.

About the Author

John M. Curtis writes politically neutral commentary analyzing spin in national and global news. He's editor of OnlineColumnist.com and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.