Is Russia the greatest threat in the Middle East?
News of the governmental unrest in Syria has seemingly
dominated the global newswires for the past two years. Not only has the military-posed regime
validated a discombobulated sense of centralized control and political
upheaval, this particular administration, commanded by the incumbent president,
Bashar al-Assad, has demonstrated a frequent propensity for wanton violence,
which has consistently resulted in the slaughter of thousands of innocents—namely,
his own civilian population. With the
recent implication of Assad’s use of sarin gas to quell opposition forces in a
Damascus suburb, governments, including the United States and France, have
posed the question to ascertain “why” these tactics have been used, and if
these tactics have breached the United Nation’s definition of illicit warfare. Perhaps, the better question is “how” Syria is
able to counter this internal insurgency on a military level, and “how” they
are able to use and/or produce sarin gas.
The Obama administration quickly denounced and condemned
Assad’s use of chemical weaponry once the US government received DNA evidence
confirming the usage of sarin gas in Damascus.
However, President Obama has flirted with the decision for military
reprisal more cautiously, and under the guise of “working in concert,” with the
US allies in the Middle East (1).
Pro-Obama or not, this was a relatively smart decision. The Obama regime has done their
homework. The US government analyzed the
historical trends of the Middle East. In
particular, the US realized that a fundamentalist regime has often overthrown
and replaced their secular predecessor.
This paradigm has exhibited significant chaos, violence, and restrictive
milieus in both Iran—with the Iranian revolution—and Egypt. Thus, this is why the Obama regime has sought
support in the US congress, as well as with the internationally community
before carrying out an attack on Syria to bolster their stance against chemical
warfare. Ultimately, the US has no
motive to attack Syria other than to maintain a precedent, overthrow a
tyrannical regime, and protect innocent lives—i.e. Syria has not dominated in
oil production or sales similar to other oil-rich countries in that region, nor
has Syria exuded a strong allegiance to the U.S [There may be economic
incentives for other countries to ban together to oust Assad, but it is dubious
to think the US can benefit from those particular incentives.](2).
Conversely, Russia has adamantly disputed the use of
sarin gas in Syria—at least by the hands of Assad’s regime. In fact, just recently, Russia issued a
statement condemning the US/Franco theory of events, in addition to the Western
forensic investigations. According to
their “Russian” forensic investigation, and due to the crude chemical strain of
the sarin gas that was used, coupled with the ineffective delivery system of the attack, the
Russian government deduced the Syrian insurgency as culpable for the sarin
attack rather than Assad’s regime(3).
Nevertheless, Russian motives have been quite questionable in their
support of Assad. Moreover, Russia has
bolstered Assad politically on numerous occasions when the Western powers or
the UN have attempted to instigate change or sanctions in Syria.
Additionally, though, Russia has invested far more in Assad
than just their political allegiance.
Russia has been illegally selling arms to Syria despite the many
economic sanctions initiated by the UN, EU, Turkey, US, and Arab League. Russia has made over a billion dollars of
revenue on these illegal arms contracts:
"The Russian defense industry source, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said Assad had started in recent months paying off a nearly $1-billion contract for four S-300 anti-aircraft missile systems and another $550 million order for 36 YAK-130 trainer fighter planes (4)."
"The Russian defense industry source, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said Assad had started in recent months paying off a nearly $1-billion contract for four S-300 anti-aircraft missile systems and another $550 million order for 36 YAK-130 trainer fighter planes (4)."
Furthermore, Russia has also been ousted as propagating several trades of S-300 anti-aircraft missile systems to the country of Iran despite sanctions. Russia has maintained their membership as part of the UN Security Council, but has continually feigned their involvement, and essentially, sabotaged political, military, and economic stability by means of illegal arms deals throughout the Middle East. The questions that have been seemingly forgotten: 1). How often has Russia been selling arms to Syria? 2) What types of arms has Russia been selling to Syria? Perhaps, if these questions are answered, the world will find out why Russia has been so adamant in denying Assad’s involvement in the chemical attacks on the Syrian population.
No comments:
Post a Comment