by Jay Janson
“Assad Must Go, Obama Says,” Washington Post, August 18, 2011,
Four years later the United States is still openly funding various organizations committed to this purpose, most of which consists of armed invaders of Syria, all the while the CIA has been reported to be helping train various morphing groups, even before being reported to be behind, along with Pentagon, ISIS, the latest such anti Syrian government group to to have entered into Syria. All this most certainly constitutes crimes against peace and crimes against humanity under Nuremberg Principles of International law.
THE DIPLOMATIC TRUTH (as spoken by Syria’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Walid al Moualem during the UN General Debate)
“Instead of settling regional and international conflicts by peaceful means, some known countries continue pursuing aggressive policies against certain nations. Political hypocrisy increases to intervene in the domestic affairs of States under the pretext of humanitarian intervention or the responsibility to protect. And when those aggressive policies did not prove beneficial for some countries, like Syria, those well-known States reveal their true face and threaten with blatant military consensus. Those same countries were supporting terrorism in Syria.”
Note the absence of naming the US, Britain, France, NATO, Turkey, Israel, Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Instead:
“some known countries continue pursuing aggressive policies against certain nations”
Since President Obama passed on the decision of the ruling financial element in the centers of power that have owned the US government since the early 1930’s, a quarter of a million Syrians have met violent death and millions made refugees.
QUESTION: With so many of his country’s people already dead and millions fleeing to Europe, why was Syria’s Foreign Minister unable to call a spade a spade. Is it fear? Will it make US leaders less likely to bomb and finish the job as they have threatened to do twice.
Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al Moualem:
“The international community should act in accordance with the relevant resolutions on counter-terrorism and take measures to compel the countries financing, arming, training and providing safe havens and passage for terrorists.”
A quarter million dead, and no call for prosecution of what the Foreign Minister certainly described as crimes against peace and crimes against humanity in the Nuremberg Principles of international law in the UN Charter.
Also embarrassing, was the Foreign Minister’s use of the term “the international community,” long used as a euphemism for ‘the Colonial Powers.’ These now ‘neocolonial powers’ still dictate to the rest of the world, which is the real international community of more than two hundred nations that make up the United Nations.
Syrian Foreign Minister continued:
“We were the ones targeted by poisonous gases in Khan al-Assal, near Aleppo,” he said. Syria had requested an investigation mission and demanded the inclusion in its mandate the ability to determine who had used chemical weapons, but the United States, France and the United Kingdom had limited the [UN] mission’s functions to deciding whether chemical weapons had been used. The mission had been awaited for more than five months and then withdrawn before completing its work.”
The Syrian delegate pointing out what appears to be a UN Secretariat insidious cooperation with the Syrian government’s self-announced enemies, might well have been expected to call for a criminal investigation of that mission’s impartiality, but none was called for though Syria had been put in great danger, being falsely condemned in corporate media and targeted for US air strikes while the UN mission’s stonewalled on releasing its findings.
Syrian Foreign Minister:
“There remains the challenge that is facing all of us whether those who are supplying terrorists with these types of weapon will abide by their legal commitments, since terrorists who used poisonous gases have received chemical agents from regional and Western countries that are well known to us,”
Perhaps for overly diplomatic language, there appears to be a confusion here. ‘Those supplying terrorists with weapons’ are prosecutable as criminals. What legal commitment could be expected from investors in terrorism? Moreover, what else but prosecution with lawsuits for indemnity could possibly dissuade profit intended investment?
The Foreign Minster clearly identified the US and it allies as having committed a crime against humanity in Syria. But when there is accusation of crime, usually and logically there follows a demand for prosecution and justice for victims. But illogically, the Foreign Minister’s statement contains no such demand, and what he said next was tantamount to a weak plea for Syria’s attackers US and EU to ‘refrain’ from breaking the law:
“The United States and the European Union should refrain from imposing immoral economic measures that contradicted the rules of international law and the principles of free trade, and accordingly lift the embargo on Cuba, as well as all unilateral coercive measures imposed on Syria, Venezuela, Belarus, Iran and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.”
Sadly, the Foreign Minister when speaking of support for the US-Iran ‘nuclear deal’ inexplicably used words that seemed to put another US victim, Iran, on a par with its deadly attacker:
“Syria looked positively upon efforts by the United States and Iran to bridge the gap of mistrust and hoped it would reflect constructively on the stability of international relations.“
The Foreign Minister citing a “A gap of mistrust” seemed to minimize the criminal sanctions and threats of nuclear attack of the US, as if the constantly popularized ‘mistrust’ of Iran was something other than an excuse for continuing US actions to dominate Iran as it has done since its CIA with British secret services organized the violent conditions for the bloody overthrow of Iran’s democratic government in 1953.
There has been for decades an atmosphere of appeasement in the UN General Assembly’s yearly General Debate. Years from now when the East resumes it world leadership in political economy and the arts and sciences after five centuries of savage European racist domination and the United Nations is reconstituted and free of colonial powers control, people will look back in astonishment to UN General Debates in which nations bombed and invaded by the US and NATO merely complained at first and then were for years silent, unable for fear of more punishing sanctions, to logically call for justice under Nuremberg Principles international law.
Devastated Syria, allowing the US to get away with genocide again during the 2015 General Debate of the UN General Assembly, is just one example in a field, which Martin Luther King described as ‘atrocity wars and covert violence on three continents since 1945 meant to maintain unjust predatory investments that Americans refuse to give up the immense profits therefrom bringing privileges and pleasures.