Beijing, Moscow cowardice should be punished

Thirty years to the day that Hafez al-Assad’s Syria began a massacre of at least 10,000 people in Hama, another one took place in Homs, and two of the world’s biggest countries did nothing to prevent a third.

In Hama, some paid tribute to those who were killed in 1982, throwing red dye into the city’s ancient water wheels on the Orontes River, and spray painting “Hafez died, and Hama didn’t. Bashar will die, and Hama won’t.” Bashar refers to current Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad, succinctly described by Christopher Hitchens as “The slobbering dauphin who (the Syrian people) got because he was the son of the slobbering tyrant who came before him.”

Syria is in crisis, but the only real question is when will Bashar al-Assad die, and how? Will it be in exile, or after being tried for crimes against humanity, or will he need to be “put down” like Gadhafi?

The current massacre “is being done in installments and distributed all across Syria,” said an opposition spokesman. “Today, all of Syria is Hama.” And Russia and China are not only letting them get away with it, but by refusing to condemn Syria they are, in the words of the opposition, giving Assad a “license to kill.”

Assad living out the rest of his life in luxury overseas would be a crime and far from just, but his immediate departure to a friendly country could prevent a civil war and save unknown numbers of civilians. Russia and China, however, seem determined to not allow that to happen. On Saturday the two vetoed a U.N. Security Council resolution that would have put even more pressure on Assad to resign. Even after the council had watered the wording down to fit other Russian objections, Moscow still found problems with it.

One objection was that the resolution didn’t place enough blame for the violence on the opposition or Muslim Brotherhood, despite the fact that the uprising began with, and still comprises, the cold-blooded murder and incarceration of peaceful protesters, something there is no excuse for. The Russians’ other problem was that the wording didn’t preclude the future use of intervention to remove Assad, even though the resolution had already added language to do just that.

With their blind ideological commitment to never exerting the tiniest influence on the “sovereignty” of any nation, China and Russia are actually making this story more likely to end in a bloodbath and revolution.

Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said that “The Security Council is not the only diplomatic tool on the planet.” Russia will try to end the crisis itself, with its foreign minister set to hold talks with Assad later in the week. We’ve been here before. Jacob Zuma and other regional leaders gave cover to Libya’s dictatorship, saying that the African Union could itself find compromise and a way forward. In the end their efforts crumbled for the same reason Russia’s efforts will fail ― dictators like Gadhafi and Assad are egotistical criminals.

The little cabal that exists between the world’s biggest human rights violators ― China, Iran, Zimbabwe, Russia ― is shrinking. The Arab Spring has cleared off a few, and each of the remaining members is seeing signs that its winter may be warming up. Putin is being challenged; China is struggling to control protests; Iran is being called on its nuclear program.

Ideology is only part of China’s and Russia’s defense of Syria. They don’t want to set precedents which could one day be applied to themselves, and they are huge trading partners in everything from gas to arms; helping to keep each other stable. Beijing, always the first to condemn “splitists” like Tibetans, Taiwanese and Uyghurs, has not had any problem in inking energy deals with newly independent South Sudan.

Somebody needs to call these opportunists on their actions. The Syrian people who are now being killed and thrown in prison for supporting regime change, will hopefully remember who their friends are. When there is finally a democratically chosen government in Syria, let’s hope they keep in mind that Russia and China at all times stood on the side of the Assad dynasty.

British firms have been among those to come out on top as the new Libyan government signs oil contracts to finance post-civil war reconstruction, and with good reason. The West was a powerful force on the side of those who overthrew Gadhafi. Chinese state-owned companies deserve only to be ignored, because if Beijing had got its way Gadhafi would still be running Libya like his own personal bank account.

Harsh words from foreign diplomats against Russia and China can only do so much ― a free Syrian people should make the cowards pay, literally.

(The China Post (Taiwan))

(Asia News Network)