No Need for Gog and Magog

I’m beginning to question the usefulness and legitimacy of the United Nations. While one UN report after another speaks to the rise in violence in Syria and its direct correlation with the inactivity of the international organization, the Security Council remains deadlocked thanks to the perpetual and illogical obdurateness of the Russians and the Chinese. Yesterday, the UN called for an end to the violence but in real terms, the condemnation is meaningless. Meanwhile, Middle East “experts” suggest the world community should do nothing overt. On Fareed Zakaria’s GPS program on CNN, regional expert Fawaz Gerges suggested that any arming of the citizens or outside military action could result in a civil war. What exists now as the regime fires its weapons upon its own people?

From an American perspective, President Obama’s condemnation of the Syrian regime is infrequent and ultimately, toothless. The president has shown his reluctance to engage directly where matters of resistance are at play. The Syrian government is likely uninterested in President Obama’s rhetoric as it has not presented a threat in the past. In Egypt, the president’s words were not what removed Mr. Mubarak but rather the persistent efforts of the Egyptian protestors. In Libya, it was not the president’s words that removed the long-time dictator but NATO and again, persistent rebel activity. Mr. Obama’s words did not change the governments in Tunisia or Yemen and it does nothing to the (so far) fledgling uprisings and concerns of the Iranians or the Bahrainians. Mr. Gerges suggested that the Assad regime is under pressure on multiple levels. At the moment, it does not show.

The president and his representatives need to force the issue in the United Nations. We should be attempting to move that archaic and reticent organization into action. In the 1960s, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Adlai Stevenson, forced the issue with the Russians over nuclear missiles in Cuba. The former Illinois governor pressured, cornered and embarrassed the Soviet ambassador until he was forced to concede. This is what the United States, in conjunction with the Arab League, should be doing at the United Nations. The Arab League, an organization made up of largely Sunni states, has no love for the notion of the Assad regime with backing from the Iranians. There are enough states throughout the world outraged over the events in Syria that such pressure upon the Syrians, not to mention their perpetual protectors, the Russians and Chinese, should force the issue.

In an earlier blog about a month ago, I worried about the unchecked nature of the Iranians and the need to work with Arab states to do just that. The Iranians are no doubt playing a part in the current crisis within their satellite state, Syria. Yet, the United States have vacated their responsibilities internationally and have left many of its allies and those in peril to the risk and hopes of others. This is a chance to reassert our principles and stand by them. Whether it is through action in the United Nations or an embargo (as suggested by many commentators) or even finding some way to assist the populace, we must abandon our peripheral stance and show the courage and leadership from which millions of people over the last century have benefitted. We are dangerously close to repeating our moral failings in Rwanda. Jews often say, with reference to the Holocaust, “never again.” Well, it happened again in east Africa and now, it’s on the verge of happening in Syria.