By Rod Kapunan
Lest it be forgotten, imperialism brought to mankind the terrible scourge of two world wars. Imperialism, being the highest stage of capitalism according to Lenin, considers war as essentially necessary to the completion of its uncomplimentary evolution. It is for this why imperialism has become synonymous to war that through the years wrought havoc and devastation to our planet.
Indeed, the renewed taste for conquest has rejuvenated imperialism. The foray of the US and North Atlantic Treaty Organization into Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and its pending entry into Syria says nothing can stop their ambition for conquest. Specifically, the decision by the European Union, spearheaded by Great Britain and France, follows the same pattern that led to the commencement of World War II.
At the outset, the arming of the rebels seeking to oust President Bashar al-Assad has not gained enthusiasm even from among the NATO members. The various rebel factions are seen to operate only in pursuit of their foreign brokers’ imperialistic ambition.
The presence of a large number of Arab jihadists, often indistinguishable from the terrorists, mostly coming from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and other Sunni-dominated Arab states, have re-polarized the conflict between the pro- and anti- Assad forces to one of a religious war similar to what has evolved in Iraq.
In fact, the retaking of a rebel stronghold in Quasyr has been attributed to the combined assault by the Syrian army and by Hezbollah. More than that, the sudden decline of support for the Syrian rebels in the international community has been blamed for the savagery and brutality they exhibited. Video clips appearing on YouTube showed rebels summarily executing by firing squad captured members of the Syrian army. Film clips showed a rebel soldier taking out the heart of a dead man with his knife and eating a part of it before his horrified audience. Even Time Magazine could not avoid reporting the atrocities without losing its credibility. Fear now looms that those arms shipment could end up in the hands of Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations fighting in Syria.
Beyond the physical consequence of increased casualty, the decision has sent a chilling message to Russia, China, and to other states that any attempt to hinder their reinvigorated imperialist expansionism will be met with force. There is in that decision a jingoistic taunt. More than that, for the first time the Western alliance has used the flag of a supposedly economic cooperation to militarily intervene. That has now resonated deep suspicion into the Russian leadership that the EU can transform into a military bloc without any formal amendment to its constitution.
Effectively, that allowed the US and its cabal of imperialists power in Europe, like Great Britain, France and Italy to secure support from a much-bigger membership without them having any inkling that the economic partnership they joined could metamorphose into a military bloc.
Paradoxically, Russia, China and the other members of the Shanghai Cooperative Organization now find themselves faced with two military blocs both seeking to dismantle their political and economic influence in countries in a supposedly post Cold War era. This new wave of aggressive imperialism is testing the mettle of Russia’s determination to maintain a balance if only to neutralize the imperialistic ambition of the West.
The arming of the Syrian rebels with sophisticated weapons with infrared anti-aircraft and the anti-tank missiles would certainly intensify the conflict. Already, death toll has reached more than 95,000, and the number of Syrian refugees continues to swell in Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq. Although the delivery of new weapons was rushed to prevent the Syrian army from overrunning the rebel-held border town of Quasyr, it was in truth meant to facilitate the implementation of the “no-fly zone” once that decision is reached by NATO.
The problem however is that Russia has already firmed up its commitment to maintain the balance in the region, and would not want any further piecemeal aggression committed by the US and NATO. The delivery of the feared S-300 ground-to-air missiles to Syria, has beyond doubt made it a risky proposition for NATO to launch an air assault as what it did in Libya.
In fact, the decision to lift the arms embargo has taken aback Russia’s foreign minister Sergei Lavrov who earlier suggested the holding of a peace conference for Syria. US State Department Secretary John Kerry, during his visit to Moscow, agreed to participate, but that now is in limbo.
Besides, the decision to send arms has only deepened the wedge among the EU members. Aside from their unresolved disagreement on how to cope with the economic crisis that has engulfed Europe, member states feel they are being dragged into a war by the US, Britain and France to principally realize their own imperialistic ambition. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has already announced it would not participate in the sending of arms to the Syrian rebels, while Austria announced its plan to withdraw its UN peacekeeping force stationed in the Golan Heights.
Finally, the decision to arm the rebels has removed all the remaining obstacles for restrain from both sides. It is now a race on who gets the upper hand in the fighting until the outcome will render the present proxy fighting outmoded. If the US and NATO feel confident nobody could stop them, that condescending attitude has turned into a feeling of collective insecurity. Apprehension looms that they might end up as the next victim to this new wave of Western imperialism carried out by the bloody process of balkanization.
No comments:
Post a Comment