Syria

Whatever may be the eventual outcome in Syria, there is no denying the fact that for all practical purposes the dream of establishing democracy and the rule of law and the institution of human rights in the Arab World is almost over.

The approach of GCC countries towards the Syrian crisis has shifted from appealing for political reforms to internationalising the issue to arming the regime’s opposition.

The absence of a credible secular substitute for Assad, a divided opposition, and deadlock in the Security Council, are all acting as stumbling blocks for the US wish to unseat Assad from power.

Overthrowing Bashar is likely to result in an Islamist regime, which might turn out to be far worse for the country’s Kurdish, Christian, Druze and Armenian minorities.

The growing violence and regional unpopularity of the Assad regime forced India to give up its erstwhile silence on Syria and vote against it both in the Security Council and General Assembly.

As long as the army remains loyal to Bashar, the rebels are unlikely to make much headway, although their continued ability to secure weapons through the Turkish border would plunge Syria into a protracted civil war.

By bringing the Syrian question to the UN Security Council on the basis of proposals formulated by the Arab League, led principally by Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the western powers ran the risk of not only facing a combined Russia-China veto but of inflaming sectarian opinion.

Presidential candidate Mohamed ElBaradei tweeted that ‘Tear gas with nerve agent has been used against the Tahrir Square demonstrators’. This raises the suspicion of use of chemical weapons in the ongoing struggle for democracy in West Asia. This commentary analyses the relevance of chemical weapons in the Arab Spring.

The rare October 4 double veto by Russia and China on the draft resolution against Syria sponsored by France, Germany, Portugal, and UK condemning Syrian action on its civilian population has come to bolster the divide within the Security Council. Russia and China hinted that they may bring their own draft resolution but, at the moment, there is no sign of reconciliation or unanimity among the P5.

China’s objection to the early release of a UN report on North Korea’s compliance with UN sanctions stemmed from its misplaced confidence in international diplomacy.