Round The World
New Delhi, 23 August 2011
Western World Pressure
WILL SYRIA
FOLLOW TRIPOLI?
By Monish Tourangbam
Research Scholar, School of International Studies (JNU)
As newsreels pour in on the rebel
forces closing in on the Libyan capital of Tripoli, world leaders are losing no time in
welcoming the ensuing victory. They have signaled the end of the Gaddafi regime
and welcomed the National Transition Council in Libya. As one anxiously awaits the developments to
unfold in strife-torn Libya,
another Arab country, Syria
is the eye of a storm where President Bashar Al-Assad hangs on to power despite
acute pressure from western nations to step aside for the march of democracy.
With the Arab Spring that started in
Tunisia, entering the fall
season, Syria
is at a precipice. The international community seems to be speaking in one
voice when it comes to condemning acts of state violence and persuading the
Syrian regime to expeditiously take the path of reform towards an effective
democracy. But, is the international response coherent? Are leaders from emerging
powers such as India, Brazil, South Africa and even China, pressuring the
Syrian President to step down? Not really.
The Indian
audience is currently locked in its own version of public discontent pouring
out into the streets viz the anti-corruption crusade led by social activist
Anna Hazare. But India
alone is not being rocked by domestic concerns. America
is struggling with setting its economic house in order, the EU is fighting the spiraling
Eurozone debt crisis and Britain
limping back to normalcy after the riots hit London and other cities. However, emerging
powers cannot sit back on foreign policy matters because of domestic problems.
Importantly,
this is a pivotal year at the foreign affairs front. India held the rotating presidency
of the United Nations Security Council for the month of August, and has had a
change of guard at the most prominent office, with Ranjan Mathai taking charge
as the new Foreign Secretary. What is New
Delhi’s stand on the prevailing Syrian situation?
Lately,
an IBSA delegation met the Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad in Damascus calling for
urgent reforms. The mood was not defined by strong-worded criticism and acute
pressure as is being seen from the western world. The group, while reaffirming
the commitment of India, Brazil and South
Africa to the sovereignty, independence and territorial
integrity of Syria
did also express grave concern at the prevailing situation and condemned violence
from all sides. It called for an immediate end to all violence and urged all
sides to act with utmost restraint and respect for human rights and
international human rights law.
Assad as
well as his Foreign Minister Walid Al-Moualem reiterated the government’s
commitment to a reform process that would lead to a multi-party democracy. The
delegation was assured that a process of revising the Constitution would be
completed by February/March 2012. President Assad acknowledged that some
mistakes had been made by the security forces in the initial stages of the
unrest and that efforts were underway to prevent their recurrence.
But at
this juncture, both the Assad regime and the protestors do not seem to be
budging from their positions and reports of violence continue to pour in. Fears
are rising of the conflict becoming protracted. The Syrian government is insisting that the unrest is
being driven by terrorists and foreign extremists to stir up sectarian strife.
No
doubt, the western countries would want the emerging nations to be more
critical in their response and move towards cutting ties with the Syrian regime
and instituting harsh economic sanctions. But, the latter, such as the IBSA
group seems to want a smoother and less dramatic transition, which would not
lead to more sectarian tensions in an ethnically diverse Syria. So,
unlike the US
and major European capitals, they are not directly calling for the ouster of
the Assad regime.
Recently,
a UN report slammed Syria
for its continued use of force despite having claimed that it had halted its campaign
to put down the protest movement by might. The United Nations has
recommended Syria be considered for investigation at the International Criminal
Court, following a month-long probe into allegations of government-sponsored killings,
torture and human rights abuse.
This might give more ammunition to
the western world to seriously move towards increasing the scope of sanctions
against the Syrian regime and also persuade dissenting voices to reconsider
their positions and adopt a harsher stance. The European Union is considering
imposing a range of sanctions against the regime, including an embargo on oil
following in the foot steps of the US, which has imposed a ban on the
import of Syrian petroleum and related products. Analysts believe that the EU
move could have serious economic impact for Syria
considering that most of Syria’s
oil exports head to Europe and gets about
28 per cent of its revenue from the oil trade.
More worrying for Syria,
is Turkey,
a major Eurasian country and a rising power in the Islamic world. Istanbul is reportedly annoyed
with how the Assad regime has handled the current situation. It remains to be
seen how Turkey
responds in the coming days. In this milieu, where does Russia
and China,
two veto wielding members of the UN Security Council, stand?
Beijing seems to be highly restrained in its position. But this is
not surprising, given China’s
policy of non-interference in the internal affairs of other States (of course a
yardstick that is defined keeping Beijing’s
economic interests in mind). Additionally, China, being an autocratic country
itself, and one that is on the verge of a leadership change, would not be keen
on voicing its opinion on socio-political upheavals in other part of the world.
Russia, on the other hand, has not supported the western calls for Assad to resign.
The Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich reportedly
commented that Assad must be given sufficient time to fulfill promises of
reforms. In the coming days, Russian and Chinese positions would assume
importance as the US
and its allies move towards further stinging sanctions.
President
Assad needs to do some serious introspection. Long time autocrats have fallen
in the Arab world, be it Ben Ali in Tunisia and Hosni Mubarak in Egypt or the
Libyan strongman Muammar Gaddafi besieged in a country he once ruled
single-handedly. One could have hardly foreseen the scale of events that have
rocked the Arab world. Syria too is in
the firing line. It is time that the regime in Damascus respects the concerns being
expressed, abjure violence, institute dramatic reforms and refrain from rhetoric
and empty promises. Otherwise, President Assad may end up digging his own grave
and being on the wrong side of history. –INFA
(Copyright, India
News and Feature Alliance)
|