Why don't we let the Syrian people decide?
I know it's all the fashion in politics today to call for regime change in Syria, and who doesn't like the idea of yet another chaotic, Mad Max-style failed state, amirite?
But I'm an old-fashioned kind of guy, and one of those old-fashioned ideas is that people should chose their own government. I know that self-determination is out of style in mainstream Democratic circles, but humor me anyway.
The question is: How do we determine what the Syrian people want?
Syria had an election in 2014, but that was mostly a joke. After all, the election didn't happen in much of the country because the civil war made that impossible.
So how can we determine what the Syrian people want if you can't hold a fair election?
Actually there is a way.
The Syrian people have consistently "voted" with their feet, and since their lives depended on it, this vote matters a lot more than any checked box.
An estimated 11 million Syrians have fled their homes since the outbreak of the civil war in March 2011. Now, in the sixth year of war, 13.5 million are in need of humanitarian assistance within the country. Among those escaping the conflict, the majority have sought refuge in neighbouring countries or within Syria itself. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), 4.8 million have fled to Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and Iraq, and 6.6 million are internally displaced within Syria.
So most Syrian refugees never actually flee Syria. Where do they flee to in Syria? Government-controlled areas.
Although nobody has exact figures on the whereabouts of the internally displaced people, or IDPs, aid officials and nongovernmental organizations say the vast majority have sought shelter in areas controlled by the government of President Bashar Assad.
“There is no doubt that many, many more displaced people are on the government side than on the opposition side,” Krzysiek said...
Nearly 80 percent of those displaced by the war within Syria have fled to government-held parts of the country, a European diplomat said. Less than a quarter have chosen the side controlled by the various rebel groups, said the diplomat, who could not be named under his nation’s standing rules.
“This probably also shows where their political preferences lie,” he said.
That in no way means that all those IDPs like the Assad government. It's probably true that a significant percentage of the IDPs want Assad gone.
However, what we know for absolute certainty is that this is an overwhelming vote against the rebel forces that would take over if we overthrew Assad.
“Once the policy people look at what the day after would be — they don’t see any options,” said Josh Landis, the director of the Center For Middle East Studies at the University of Oklahoma. “The two strongest militias in Syria are Al Qaeda and ISIS, which would undoubtedly profit and would move into Damascus, were the Assad regime to be destroyed.”
Landis said that any gains made by rebel groups would inevitably lead to sectarian violence against minorities, and would have dire humanitarian consequences for the 15 million people who currently live in Assad-controlled territory.
Rebel violence has particularly affected Syria’s minorities, like Christians and Alawites — a Shia sect that Assad belongs to — as well as Sunnis from pro-government areas, who have been perceived as supporting Assad...
“We’ve seen that wherever rebel militias have taken Alawite or Christian regions,” Landis said, “the Alawites flee within 24 hours. There are no Alawites left, or else they’re taken captive. And Christians are gone. … That’s what’s most likely to happen in the rest of Syria if the Syrian army were destroyed.”
It seems bizarre to see Christian Republicans in America applauding a Syrian policy that would result in the extermination of Christians in Syria.
It seems bizarre to see liberals in America applauding a Syrian policy that would result in the extermination of minorities in Syria.
As for the rebel fighters, a lion's share of them aren't even Syrian, so I don't think their vote should count.
When will we stop pretending that we are acting with the interests of the Syrian people?
Comments
Because
in the past I believe you have urged us not to discount the violence emanating from the Assad forces, I appreciate your point here. At the same time, I think the realities for refugees don't necessarily translate into votes for or against any political solution, other than for peace.
So I think your assertion is absolutely right that by any measure of what we know, by everything we can assume the people of Syria have experienced, just by looking at the conditions of life in Assad's pre-war Syria and by looking at the conditions of life in post-regime-change Libya, only an insane person would prefer ISIS to Assad.
Without a doubt it's a matter of lesser evils
But until someone invents a Door #3, the people of Syria have spoken.
"To veil the threat of terror"
Blah blah blah etc., since at least 1899 Phillipines. In other words, because U.S. government imposes racist caretaker philosophy on all since forever and it is systemic? That's what I think. Er, someone made me think it anyway. Howard Zinn or Studs Terkel, can't remember which. Thanks
Peace & Love
But, but, but..... We can't do that
they need saving and only we can save them, amirite? Of course I am right, I'm an American, sheesh...
Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur
Mor Bomz!!1!
.
Compensated Spokes Model for Big Poor.
We as in you and me and Bobby McGee?
Or we in as our government? Because we as in you and me and Bobby McGee can't decide shit in our own country let alone decide what people in other countries should decide.
I think the Syrians and Americans are sort in the same boat, none of us can really decide anything and we're all being ruled by psychos.
Basically the only way either of us are going to be able to decide a thing is if we do a regime change in this country.
The US does not give a damn about democracy or human life
That is a historical truth. Eisenhower blocked the scheduled UN plebiscite in Vietnam because it was obvious that Ho Chi Minh would have won and there would have been a united Vietnam that was Socialist. By doing this, it resulted in the death of 2 million Vietnamese, and millions of Cambodians. By the way, the MSM joined in the continuous lies, from the Gulf of Tonkin incidence to almost all war reports. We have perfected the American geopolitical killing machine, from fabricating false flags, to marketing an illegal war, to killing maiming and torturing and lying, all the meanwhile claiming that we were the good guys. If we believe in democracy, how about allowing the people of Saudi Arabia to decide their government, or Kuwaitis, or any of the despotic ME oil countries? Or how about calling for a plebiscite in Crimea and abiding by the results?
Even discussing the overthrow of a legitimate government and member of the UN should be considered a war crime. The irony of all of this is that the US, as the major superpower, has the most to gain from an orderly world that respects international law. If you have been listening to President Vladimir Putin and Minister Sergei Lavrov you will have realized that they phrase all of their arguments in terms of international law.
Before we had Neocon idiots running our foreign policy, now we have amateur neocon idiots running our foreign policy. The problem is that we have the world's largest, most lethal military. We are not nearly wise enough to be allowed to do this. It should be up to our so-called friends in Western Europe to moderate our behavior. It seems, though, that they are more interested in getting their vicarious thrills through us of empire long lost.
The lesson learned by other major countries is that they need a believable military deterrent. President Putin made this part of his strategy to rebuild Russia. China took longer to realize this, but are now seriously on the path to considerable self-defense. India, Pakistan, Iran all realize that the US is major threat and they need a believable defense. The US has backed itself into a corner. We have a high-tech military based on low loss of life, our lives. If there is considerable risk we will back-off. For instance, North Korea has almost 1000 military aircraft, including some MIG29s, one of the fastest fighter aircraft in the world. They also have the bomb. Trump had better put two and two together and realize that US military bases and major Asian cities are at risk. Consider that we have killed millions in illegal wars, why would they hesitate to kill millions in self defense?
Trump is playing a very dangerous game. The US has crossed many lines that were in place in the first Cold War, and now is going where no nation dare to go based on POTUS's ego. Consider this analogy. It's 1970 and the Vietnam war is raging. The USSR decides to punish South Vietnam because of fake moral outrage about some made-up act of the South Vietnamese government, by firing 59 missiles into Saigon. That would have been way over the line for the Cold War. I believe that we have not yet seen Russia's response to the cruise missile attack.
Anyway, to get back to my original point, it's really all about perceived friends and enemies, and has absolutely nothing to do with democracy. Democracy is the marketing ploy that we use to sell our war crimes.
Capitalism has always been the rule of the people by the oligarchs. You only have two choices, eliminate them or restrict their power.
Your comment
here is one of the best descriptions of the state of affairs that I have read anywhere.
Syria has long been a Russian client state.
Could you imagine our reaction to a Russian attack on Panama? The media loves to show tragic pictures of kids and wail "why don't we do something?!". We are being conditioned to be Team America: World Police and us taxpayers are footing the bill. We could cut our military in half and still have a bad ass military, but it's not about power, it's about control.
The real SparkyGump has passed. It was an honor being your human.
‘Nobody is thinking about a return’
SYRIA:direct: Voices from the ground after car bombing kills more than 100 evacuees from pro-regime villages
That is some powerful peace propaganda right there, does that ever make it to the TV machine? Nope? No wonder nobody asks why.
Thanks
I always listen to the People.
Self Determination is the most important Human Right.
Here's the answer from Quora:
It's about a pipeline. Syria is letting a pipeline from Iran pass through the country to the Mediterranean and not letting one from Qatar pass. Also, it's multi-racial, which bothers Israel and the Saudis, who both are intent on exterminating all Shiites in the ME. The US is obligated to fight battles for both of them. So, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Israel, the US, and Turkey created ISIS. Also, Syria's oil is nationalized, which is a Mortal Sin to the Neocons unless Israel is doing it, because reasons.
The Deep State is increasingly terrified by democracy. Who can blame them after what the Crimean people did for themselves?
[EDIT]
There are more than a dozen US NGOs sucking up US grants, who are dedicated to "bringing democracy to Syria." They are all thoroughly corrupt and are major participants in the psyops being used on the American people.
I presented all these arguments — when Hillary Clinton and Chris Stephens were running guns with the CIA out of Benghazi — over at TOP while that neocon cesspool was ginning up for a new war in Syria. After the Benghazi attack, and then Ukraine, it became stunningly clear what was (and is) going on there, and who is pulling the strings.
Carry a flame and share the light.
.
This may be the most important point:
Citizens of another country preferring to live by a different set of values must terrify the likes of Hillary and Trump. Those that wish to hold power can only do so under their own terms. If the rules are not in their favor they can no longer prevail. Theirs is a precarious position, if we, the great unwashed, learn from those citizens of other countries. Heaven help them if we ever figure out how nice it is to live in some other country.
Yes well, self-determination is all neat in theory
But if we let the Syrian people decide they are absolutely going to decide to go with the Russian pipeline over the American/European one. They still won't be connected to the world bank.
Obviously, we can't allow that.
ps: added to my ever-growing Syria compendium with cite.
A lot of wanderers in the U.S. political desert recognize that all the duopoly has to offer is a choice of mirages. Come, let us trudge towards empty expanse of sand #1, littered with the bleached bones of Deaniacs and Hope and Changers.
-- lotlizard
Heh! Well I doubt they will be selling their oil
...for Petrodollars, like they used to do. Water under the bridge, that. Their nationalized oil will help them rebuild their country out of the rubble.
Carry a flame and share the light.
.
Trying to figure out
what nationalization of the oil industry in Syria really means, I found this site interesting because it is very detailed, but what it also coveys is that the whole economic progress of a country is complex, incremental, and especially subject to things like drought, the Iran/Iraq War, oil prices, oil quality, and so forth.
Essentially though, the basic struggle between planning an economy so that working people can make a living, versus allowing market forces to create wealth for the wealthy and poverty for working people, is an ongoing challenge that the Syrian government has tried to conduct in the interests of working people. Or so it seems from what I'm reading.
I'm posting the following as just an example of the details involved, including pipelines, which you've focused on before.
50+ Years Later and It's Still the Domino Effect...
Only this time it's not the Evil Empire we're fighting, it's self determination itself.
Only terrorists don't like American hegemony.
“Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” ~ Sun Tzu
Syrian Economy
wiki:
Why can't the Syrian people
Why can't the Syrian people be 'allowed' to decide for themselves, you ask?
The US Psychopathic Class won't allow the American people to make their own free choices in elections - of course they don't want to let the people of the countries they plan to invade make their own choices.
Their forte seems to be setting up 'democratic' government - by force, where this is required - with a public electoral 'choice' of whatever puppet they prefer. The other option is 'or else'.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.