An anticipated change has come about in international affairs. The United States has expressed more continuity than discontinuity in its actions in the recent times. The hegemon is once again on prowl. The politics and society of Syria are abuzz with sound of war drums and swish of super-sonic aircrafts coming closer. Would there be another war, mindless devastation as we have got used to?
As United States is nearing winding up of its mission in Afghanistan, a disturbing pattern has emerged over the years. The United States keeps a new target ready before leaving the earlier one. The plans for obtaining control of oil reserves have been there long before 9/11 episode. And, in maturing these plans, essential care is taken to deny free access to oil to America’s geopolitical rivals – China and Russia. Under these circumstances it becomes imperative to analyse global impact of a possible US aggression in Syria.
The revisionist policies adopted by the United States and its allies over the years have generated deep mistrust and contempt for international conventions and institutions among the world nations. There is a perverse and persistent attempt by the US to downgrade the Security Council and the United Nations. An attack on Syria surpassing the United Nations will contribute to ever deepening distrust and contempt. The world body, as a result, will lose international prestige.
Beginning with a fundamental question, one can ask who stands benefited from the alleged chemical weapon attack in Damascus. The Assad regime being fully aware of the negative fallouts of such an attack would never resort to such tactics. The rebels clearly seem to be gaining in the scenario. Assuming Obama gets congressional approval for the attack, the whole of Levant will dive into depths of instability.
Analysts believe that an attack on Syria will prompt Syria to launch aggression on Israel, a country that possesses lethal fire power to flatten Damascus. Syrian authorities were quoting as saying, “We have two options; to surrender or to defend ourselves, and we will definitely choose the second option.”
Syria will definitely retaliate by attacking Israel. Can we then expect Iran and Hezbollah to lose the opportunity to settle scores with Israel? It is presumed that Syria too possesses the capability to carry out splendid strikes and sufficiently destroy Israel’s capability. Extra regional actors like China and Russia will leave no stone unturned to stop the US and its allies from securing Syrian oil-fields.
A conflict of such sort will have spill-over effects on the already dwindling global economy. We have seen how stock markets tumbled when the news about joint missile tests by the US and Israel in the Mediterranean spread. In addition, millions of civilians will be killed and rendered homeless as the convention has been in such sort of conflicts.
At this stage of history, the US is in no position to bear moral responsibility emerging out of such a scenario. Disarmament scholars and enthusiasts are apprehensive that the US adventures like this will force the states world over into a mad race for armaments to defend their vital interests. It is perhaps these fears that have forced the US to suspend the attack for a while, termed as “historical retreat” by Damascus. The irrationalities and contradictions have never been as prominent as they are today.
To sum up, the United States, in its uni-polar moment and at the exceptional height of its structural power in Susan Strange’s sense of the term, has been unable to deepen commitments to international norms and rules. Hence, the time for introspection has never been as ripe as it is today.