Defend Syria against imperialism

Workers World has made its position clear again and again with regard to the recent events in Syria: no imperialist intervention! That means the U.S., Britain, France and all of NATO must keep hands off. It means “no” to intervention, whether or not NATO, the Arab League or the United Nations Security Council approves.

Workers World welcomes the decision of China and Russia to veto the resolution before the Security Council that would have opened the door to U.N.-backed intervention against Syria. Last March, such a resolution disguised as a means of protecting civilians in Libya led to the deaths of thousands of Libyans, and the destruction its infrastructure and its sovereign government.

Nassar Ibrahim of the Alternative Information Center wrote a thorough analysis on Feb. 9 in the article, “Syria: the Middle East’s tipping point.” It is worthwhile to excerpt some of his points here.

“The struggle for Syria isn’t just about Syria,” Ibrahim writes, “it’s the struggle for a free, democratic Middle East versus one that lives under the yoke of American and Israeli hegemony. … [It] has a crucial significance from various strategic points of view. …

“From the moment that the Arab League made the decision to suspend Syria’s membership, entailing a series of sanctions against the Syrian people, the clashes happening in Syria have moved to another level. This became even clearer with the second proposed U.N. resolution — calling for a democratic transition and for Bashar Al Assad to step down — which was stopped by Russia and China’s vetoes last Saturday for the second time in four months.

“There have been two attempts to prepare the ground for a military intervention — that the U.S., European and Arab countries would like to see and that 13 out of 15 U.N. Security Council members voted for. Such fervor reminds one of the international climate before the war against Iraq began in 2003.

“With the recent developments, the façade has tumbled down disclosing the real goals hidden behind different masks, revealing that the slogans demanding freedom, democracy and human rights have been used as a battering-ram by the advocates for an intervention to break Syria. The objective seems clear: depriving the country of its role and the Syrian people of their will.”

The imperialists, writes Ibrahim, have two possible scenarios in Syria.

First, “to ride the wave of the Arab revolts, employing full force to overthrow Syria using a comprehensive political, psychological and media war, including the internationalization of the crisis and the call for an external intervention (like the one that occurred in Libya) to finally turn this NATO-hostile country into a satellite state. …”

If this fails, to “sink Syria in a quagmire of destruction, exhausting its resources as state and society and, in doing so, erasing the gains of its historical role at the regional and international level. This would be achieved by fueling sectarian violence and by arming terrorist organizations and extremist groups.”

Ibrahim concludes with this point: “There is no room to be neutral or ambiguous in the face of this confrontation, and the duty of the resistance forces and the actors struggling for a democratic change across the Arab world — the actors that shouldn’t be forgotten — is, therefore, to evolve and protect Syria and the broader Middle East.” (See alternativenews.org)

For the anti-war and anti-imperialist movement inside the U.S., there is a similar conclusion. We should do everything within our power to prevent and obstruct the intervention of the imperialists in Syria.