A - I n f o s
a multi-lingual news service by, for, and about anarchists **

News in all languages
Last 40 posts (Homepage) Last two weeks' posts

The last 100 posts, according to language
Greek_ 中文 Chinese_ Castellano_ Català_ Deutsch_ Nederlands_ English_ Français_ Italiano_ Polski_ Português_ Russkyi_ Suomi_ Svenska_ Türkçe_ The.Supplement

The First Few Lines of The Last 10 posts in:
Greek_ 中文 Chinese_ Castellano_ Català_ Deutsch_ Nederlands_ English_ Français_ Italiano_ Polski_ Português_ Russkyi_ Suomi_ Svenska_ Türkçe
First few lines of all posts of last 24 hours || of past 30 days | of 2002 | of 2003 | of 2004 | of 2005 | of 2006 | of 2007 | of 2008 | of 2009 | of 2010 | of 2011 | of 2012 | of 2013

Syndication Of A-Infos - including RDF | How to Syndicate A-Infos
Subscribe to the a-infos newsgroups
{Info on A-Infos}

(en) Organisation Communiste Libertarie - Syria, the perfect response by Santiago Alba Rico (fr) [machine translation]

Date Tue, 03 Sep 2013 14:38:37 +0300

A view that seemed interesting to know, even if there are other things to say.
But already the "no war" or the refusal of Western intervention (now more modestly Franco-étatsunienne) that we fully share is not enough to define a policy in this context it should also be positioned against the bloody regime of Bashar al-Assad and make some general statements about the future of this region, the future of these peoples and people of all regimes - and those who would succeed them - and the boundaries imposed by force by the imperialist powers, including the Palestinian and Kurdish cases illustrate alone tragically disastrous consequences. ---- The stakes in this war and Western intervention, beyond the question of the survival of the regime. It tends to redefine the political map of the Middle East. It is also at this level that we must try to understand it and lie.

August 31, 2013

Regarding the military "action" more than likely the Government of the United States to Syria, there are two positions equally absurd:

That those who claim that Bashar al-Assad has not used chemical weapons. A murderer who bombed and launched missiles at its own people, the people who systematically torture and slaughter women and children, is probably capable of launching sarin gas or any other lethal substance which its citizens.
That those who claim that the United States does not lie on the use of chemical weapons in Syria. Power capable of invading Iraq after inventing evidence and falsifying documents, which did not close Guantanamo and systematic practice of extrajudicial executions outside its borders and from the air, is perfectly capable of lying also in the case of Syria, as so many times before.

From the point of view of law and justice, it is imperative to investigate and determine whether and used chemical weapons in Syria and try to prosecute and convict the guilty, whoever they are. But a serious political analysis, not "ideological" and nonsectarian rather must be based on demonstrable facts alone. They are two in number. The first is that, regardless of whether or not used chemical weapons against his own people, the dictatorship of the Assad dynasty is the first and directly responsible for the destruction of Syria, the suffering of its people and all the consequences, human, and regional policies that result. Under a painful paradox (at least painful for the author of these lines), some of those who now clamor "against the war", as if there had not already been two years kept silent about the crimes of the Syrian regime or worse, have practiced the most abject denial. Judging by their vehement denunciations, vibrant moral authority, the U.S. military would be willing to bomb a peaceful and prosperous country, led by a popular government whose only crime is to "resist" the insidious attacks of Israel. This "moral outrage" of some anti-imperialist - I must admit - sounds to me as so obnoxiously hypocritical invocations of "democracy" and the "humanitarianism" of the imperialists.

The second indisputable fact is that regardless whether he lied about the use of chemical weapons in Syria, the government of the United States has not the slightest interest in democracy and the protection of civilians or to the "moral" issue of chemical weapons. He thinks only of his own interests, as always, never interests coincide with those of the people he claims to want to help and those who historically have been abandoned, subject bombed and murdered. This truism (some desperate Syrians would in turn deny) is fully compatible with the previous one, because the truth is that in this world can hold a lot of criminal forces and relatively independent of each other, no one can force us to apply the principles of logic to ethical and political dilemmas. A declaration of a person who supported him that "it is not possible to be in two places at the same time" , Groucho Marx responded with joyful strength: "It is not true. New York and Washington are in two different places at the same time. " In history, the battle in the revolution, in this terrible world, it is perfectly possible that Bashar al-Assad has used chemical weapons and at the same time Obama lied on the use of chemical weapons Bashar al-Assad.

Once accepted these facts certified, and facing imminent attack étatsunienne, it is certainly imperative to "condemn" (as if it was nothing more than a rhetorical exercise and save conduit acquire the right to speak and be heard in some circles), but it is imperative to understand. We condemn that (condemn, condemn, condemn) the étatsunienne attack, we can choose one of these two "stories":

1. the United States (here, a unit Abominable, as monolithic and ahistorical that can be a "Plan") carries with it, since its origins, a plan for world domination designed in illo tempore and consistently applied, a providential plan omnipotent and that carries with it since the dawn of time, regardless of the balance of forces and changing avatars in the region, the overthrow of the nationalist government, strong Socialist Baath Party in Syria plan he organized or at least he used a popular pseudo-revolution, after arming the so-called "rebels" to the teeth, look for two years as a pretext to justify the attack and invasion of the country map blocked by Russia, Iran and China, and now, thanks to a lie amplified by the media mercenaries of imperialism, is finally about to be realized.

. 2 The United States (a unit direction worked with many contradictions, like everything in this world) sometimes do not have a plan, but many and many doubts, Syria is an enemy in the context of his clash with Iran and its excessive defense of Israel, but does little discomfort and guarantees, to a certain extent, the status quo in the region where the wave of so-called "Arab Spring" the Syrian people trying to shake off the yoke of 40 years of dictatorship, the Obama administration supports their cause rhetorically, concerned in any case by the army in which drift gaining ground (a very Leninist) the most radical Islamist groups, and for this it combines formal support to the Syrian revolution with the greatest caution when giving arms to rebels from the beginning, he tries by all means not to militarily involved in a hornet's nest which he knows not being able to get anything and, in addition, can also harm Israel from a certain moment, he opted for a political solution to reach an agreement with Russia, feels more threatened by Al-Qaeda by Bashar al-Assad, but he talked a lot, set a red line and needed now, because it is low, a demonstration of force, as explained in the New York Times Edward Luttwak, Center for Strategic and International Studies, combines the need to do something he does not want to, and scope "limited and almost propagandist" (which depends not only on them) with its true interests, and it is to say no, not the overthrow of Assad and the establishment of democracy, but the extension of the Syrian war as long as possible to avoid not win one of the two opponents (or Assad or the rebels), both extremely dangerous for the plan étatsunien regional domination (with much cynicism, Luttwak argues that the United States should provide arms to the rebels every time they lose ground and close the valve to each Once they earn).

The first story has a flaw: it is consistent as myth. The second story has a virtue: it is uncertain as reality itself. The first story - in addition to the free publicity of the omnipotence of U.S. imperialism in its lowest hours and want the military intervention, involves despise people who are fighting in the region, to ignore their pain, justify their executioners. The second story puts us in a complex bee-eater, full of ethical and political dilemmas, where nothing is certain, but which also - now or later - people can win something, but not all, and they can all lose, but not dignity.

I condemn, condemn, condemn the U.S. military intervention for all the right reasons explained by Yassin Swehat in an excellent recent text : because it would not be legal, because it is going to exacerbate the suffering of the population, because it is the Syrian people must get rid of the dictator, because international solidarity can be much more efficient in other ways, because this procedure does not intend to help the Syrian people and because consequences, even if she wanted to and was able to overthrow the regime (which is an extravagant assumption), would still be contrary to the revolution that he and many other Syrians have argued from the beginning.
A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://ainfos.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en

A-Infos Information Center