Houla Massacre is No ‘Turning Point’ for Syria (NeueZurcherZeitung,
Switzerland)
“Arming
the opposition, as Qatar and other Gulf nations propose and are actively pursuing,
carries the risk of inciting a fully-fledged civil war. As was sufficiently
demonstrated in Iraq, this type of radicalization has a way of encouraging
suicide bombers blinded by religious fervor who make up fringe groups allied
with al-Qaeda. … Houla is not likely a turning point,
but a sad milestone in the hard-fought survival of a murderous regime whose
time has definitely passed.”
The unforgivable crime of a regime desperate to cling to power: Two of the dozens of children killed at point blank range during a house to house rampage of innocents, in Houla, Syria, on May 26. The Syrian government denies that it has anything to do with the attacks.
KafrHoula. The name of this village, some
12 miles northwest of the city of Homs, marks a new low in Syrian history. Although
the bloody events that led to the deaths of over a hundred people last Friday have
yet to be entirely clarified, over the Pentecostal holiday, a
diplomatic offensive with unforeseeable consequences for the Assad regime has been
set in motion. It is significant that the U.N. Security Council, including Russia
and China, strongly condemned the atrocities in Houla.
There is no doubt that the shocking video images of dead women and children resulted
in a public outcry that forced diplomats to act.
Fear of desertions
Since the arrival of the first U.N. observers on April 12, the
situation has changed. Despite opposition reports that repression and bloodshed
continues to take a heavy toll among the rebelling population, the situation
has developed to the detriment of the Assad regime. The presence of what are by
now 280 observers has led to fewer open confrontations and has made mounting sieges
like the one that occurred in the BabAmru district of Homs impossible. One consequence of this
is that the armed resistance has been able to expand its area of control and
secure its positions. The recent bombing attacks in Damascus and Aleppo, for
which responsibility is not clear, are yet another indication that the highly
fragmented Syrian opposition has changed its tactics.
KafrHoula lies in a region that is
partly controlled by the Free Syrian Army, which is composed largely of Syrian
Army deserters. At this point, the regular army has no option other than proceeding
with the use of artillery against pockets of resistance. This way it is able to
prevent losses in its own ranks. But more importantly, by intentionally
refraining from sending soldiers into combat, the army reduces the risk of mass
desertions. Who was responsible for the close-range shooting of women and
children in Houla is the subject of further investigation.
But suspicions that responsibility lies with members of the loyalist AlawiteShabiha militia are obvious.
Under current conditions, it will be difficult and costly to
precisely determine the course of the event within a practical time frame. In the
meantime, the atrocity continues to serves as fodder for additional war
propaganda on both sides. Government officials see military action against
deserters as a legitimate use of force and are distancing themselves from the Shabiha. The rebels, on the other hand, communicating through
the Syrian National Council, assert that they will launch an armed war of
liberation if the international community cannot find a way to protect
civilians.
What to do?
But what must, should, or can, our "international
community" do? In its non-binding statement on Sunday, the U.N. Security
Council reminded the Syrian government of U.N. envoy Kofi Annan's six-point
plan, which prohibits the use of heavy artillery on populated areas. But the
fact that there should be no illusions about the impact of the declaration was
illustrated on Monday, when artillery attacks against parts of the city of Hafa were announced. Moscow won't allow the Assad regime to
fall tomorrow. The interests Russia has in its last Middle East ally are too
vast.
So far, NATO has given no indication of a possible
intervention. One possibility would be the setting-up of so-called security
zones for civilian refugees. Such humanitarian corridors necessitate control of
air space, as was done in northern and southern Iraq during Saddam's regime. However,
because of the close proximity of opponents and supporters of the regime, it
seems that such an approach would be impractical.
Posted by Worldmeets.US
Arming the opposition, as Qatar and other Gulf nations propose
and are actively pursuing, carries the risk of inciting a fully-fledged civil
war. As was sufficiently demonstrated in Iraq, this type of radicalization has
a way of encouraging suicide bombers blinded by religious fervor who make up
fringe groups allied with al-Qaeda. The first signs of this can already be seen
in Syria. Finally, there are certain expectations with regard to Turkey, a country
that could distinguish itself in a positive way as a new force for order in the
region. But even this cannot be relied upon, if only because Prime Minister Erdogan, who cut the army down to size, doesn't want to
give the military any opportunity to do away with him.
So Houla is not likely a turning
point, but a sad milestone in the hard-fought survival of a murderous regime
whose time has definitely passed.
