Note (September 20, 2014): My thoughts on the issue of U.S. intervention in Syria has changed in the past year, largely because of what I've read by some Syrian activists on Twitter and other online platforms. While I am certainly opposed to U.S. imperialism, I think that the U.S. military actually has an obligation to support popular uprisings, including the Syrian Revolution, in defending themselves against dictators like Assad. The U.S. also has an obligation to ensure that it doesn't contribute to human rights abuses, and in preventing that the U.S. could work with Syrian revolutionary councils to monitor groups like the Free Syrian Army (an idea I took from this article about Syrian revolutionary Razan Zaitouneh). I think activists in the United States have to do more than reflexively oppose U.S. intervention when it might, if only accidentally, do something right. So while I say throughout this piece that the Syrian "revolution deserves better," it also deserved a better analysis than I gave it.
President Obama has declared that he will seek approval for a U.S. military strike on Syria when congress gets back in session on September 9th. This gives activists just under a week to organize against a further escalation of U.S. imperialism in the Middle East. Yet, it's not enough just to oppose the war—we have to be clear why.
As I have said in the past, I am strongly supportive of the Syrian Revolution. It is because, and not in spite of this, that I oppose U.S. military intervention. The United States has never entered a foreign country without attempting to open markets and broaden our sphere of power and influence.
The Syrian Revolution was begun by grassroots citizens councils calling for democracy and a more equitable economy. However, with U.S. military intervention, the possibility of Syria's future actually resting in the hands of the Syrian people would be obliterated.
The Revolution deserves better.
Unfortunately, most the American left simply doesn't get it. Groups like the Workers World Party and the Party for Socialism and Liberation have been actively supporting the Assad dictatorship since Day 1 of the revolution. The basic reasoning is that because Assad has occasionally stood up to the United States, his bloody regime is worthy of their full support. Nevermind the fact that Syria has worked hand in glove with the Israeli government, supported the U.S. invasion of Kuwait in the early '90's, and brutally suppressed its own people for 43 years. If the Assad regime wins out, the possibility of Syria's future resting in the hands of the Syrian people would be non-existent.
The Revolution deserves better.
Other sections of the left are justifying their opposition to U.S. intervention by bashing the Syrian rebels and, like the U.S. government in its War Against Terror, by spreading fear about Islamist influence among anti-Assad fighters. It is true that fundamentalist Islamists have jumped on the bandwagon of the Syrian Revolution, but they did not start it and there's no reason to believe that they'll finish it. Just because President Assad characterizes the revolution as an Islamist power grab doesn't mean that progressives should believe him!
Another common refrain is support of a "peace conference" to be held between both sides of the conflict, including the imperial powers using Syria as their proxy. To hope for ceasefire and a brokered peace is to reject the demands of the Syrian revolution. It is natural to wish for an end to the bloodshed, but if none of the Syrian people's demands are met, a new rebellion is sure to begin anew sometime not far down the road. If the fate of Syria is carved out by imperial powers, the possibility of Syria's future actually resting in the hands of the Syria people would still be crushed.
The Revolution deserves better.
I believe that those striving for freedom and liberty around the world should stand firmly in solidarity with the Syrian revolution. Practically, that means that we should consider the self-determination of the Syrian people to be our core demand for our activism throughout the week to come. Unlike the Assad, Obama, and Putin administrations, the anti-war movement should actually care what happens to the Syrian people.
-Schuyler Kempton
President Obama has declared that he will seek approval for a U.S. military strike on Syria when congress gets back in session on September 9th. This gives activists just under a week to organize against a further escalation of U.S. imperialism in the Middle East. Yet, it's not enough just to oppose the war—we have to be clear why.
 |
| Demonstration in Homs, before Assad turned violent and the Syrian protest movement became a civil war |
The Syrian Revolution was begun by grassroots citizens councils calling for democracy and a more equitable economy. However, with U.S. military intervention, the possibility of Syria's future actually resting in the hands of the Syrian people would be obliterated.
The Revolution deserves better.
Unfortunately, most the American left simply doesn't get it. Groups like the Workers World Party and the Party for Socialism and Liberation have been actively supporting the Assad dictatorship since Day 1 of the revolution. The basic reasoning is that because Assad has occasionally stood up to the United States, his bloody regime is worthy of their full support. Nevermind the fact that Syria has worked hand in glove with the Israeli government, supported the U.S. invasion of Kuwait in the early '90's, and brutally suppressed its own people for 43 years. If the Assad regime wins out, the possibility of Syria's future resting in the hands of the Syrian people would be non-existent.
The Revolution deserves better.
Other sections of the left are justifying their opposition to U.S. intervention by bashing the Syrian rebels and, like the U.S. government in its War Against Terror, by spreading fear about Islamist influence among anti-Assad fighters. It is true that fundamentalist Islamists have jumped on the bandwagon of the Syrian Revolution, but they did not start it and there's no reason to believe that they'll finish it. Just because President Assad characterizes the revolution as an Islamist power grab doesn't mean that progressives should believe him!
Another common refrain is support of a "peace conference" to be held between both sides of the conflict, including the imperial powers using Syria as their proxy. To hope for ceasefire and a brokered peace is to reject the demands of the Syrian revolution. It is natural to wish for an end to the bloodshed, but if none of the Syrian people's demands are met, a new rebellion is sure to begin anew sometime not far down the road. If the fate of Syria is carved out by imperial powers, the possibility of Syria's future actually resting in the hands of the Syria people would still be crushed.
The Revolution deserves better.
I believe that those striving for freedom and liberty around the world should stand firmly in solidarity with the Syrian revolution. Practically, that means that we should consider the self-determination of the Syrian people to be our core demand for our activism throughout the week to come. Unlike the Assad, Obama, and Putin administrations, the anti-war movement should actually care what happens to the Syrian people.
-Schuyler Kempton
No comments:
Post a Comment