By: Zuheir Kseibati
Even if it were to go down in history that Arab children were exterminated with Arab chemical weapons, this will not be taken into account by whoever still believes in the illusion of a military settlement in Syria, because it is the spoiled child of a major state.
Naturally, the Syrian regime denied the use of chemical weapons in the toxic gas massacres that afflicted the Eastern Ghouta regions at dawn, which left two possibilities in regard to the identity of the perpetrator: it is either the opposition or the devil.
Following the crimes in Ghouta – which surpassed what was said about the Al-Anfal campaign in Iraq – it was a naive joke for British Foreign Minister William Hague to volunteer and promise the public that the accusations of the Syrian opposition will be transferred to the Security Council, but only in case the allegations are confirmed. As for the images of the horrific massacre, the bodies of children wrapped in white robes and the corpses that are enough to shake people's consciences around the world, they might be fabricated as claimed by the regime in Damascus in order to embarrass it, at a time when the United Nations team is launching its investigations into the use of chemical weapons in Khan al-Assal. This is the regime's primary condition, in the hope that the opposition would be accused of having used such weapons, knowing that its interests at this level intersected with the West's wishes to besiege the revolution with the rope of the Jihadists, Al-Nusra Front and the terrorists.
Indeed, did the revolution not retreat to the back seats among the viewers, while the Free Army and the regime are being asked to wage a common war against the terrorism of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant? This is at least what is revealed by the leaked information regarding Russian-American understandings, rendering the predicament endured by the revolution a secondary issue and dialogue between the opposition and Al-Assad's regime inevitable if the Syrians want to get rid of the affliction of terrorism, destruction, and bloodshed.
But when talking about the viewers watching the greatest tragedy of the 21st century, one must show some fairness. Here is French President Francois Hollande asking the UN team to change its course from Khan al-Assal to Al-Ghouta, in the hope that it would catch the devil responsible for the chemical gases crime. However, Hollande does not have a magic wand capable of alleviating the Russians' sentiments or of shaking their confidence in their Damascene ally and its intentions! Hence, if the fall of more 100,000 dead failed to shake Kremlin's wager on the stay of the Syrian regime in power, will the Al-Anfal campaign in Ghouta and the children's corpses be enough to alter Moscow's sympathy towards it and its insistence on paralyzing the Security Council? It is probably accusing the revolutionaries or the terrorists as well, considering that the more the crimes are reproduced or the more the victim is repeatedly killed, the signs of genocide get lost.
For its part, the Syrian army believed that what happened in Ghouta was a media war, following an official justification classifying yesterday's massacres as being mere images carried by channels "that are partners in the bloodshed" affecting the Syrian people!
In the meantime, the Europeans and Americans are focusing on the violence in Egypt while brandishing the aid weapon. Their heart is with the Syrians. But are mere images worth a Security Council session or dragging the perpetrator to the International Criminal Court?
The victim is the same, whether in Egypt, Syria, Tunisia, Libya or Yemen, although the Kosovars are luckier. In the meantime, the Americans' threats are no longer frightening anyone, not even to the Taliban! The mistake of President of the American "dream" Barack Obama's administration is that it revealed all its cards early on, thus saying: There will be no more coffins for our soldiers at war. And the safe pullout triggered a fierce attack by those whom the West thought it had besieged with crises in their backyards and its implicit threats, from Chechnya to Georgia, going through Iran and its nuclear file and the missiles shield.
In light of the wave of counterattack, the Iranians are proceeding underneath the Russian umbrella towards nuclear Natanz, South Lebanon, the Syrian coast and the Sayeda Zainab region. As for Iran's incoming President Hassan Rohani, who is moderate and has a promising approach of openness, he promised President Bashar al-Assad's regime that it will remain in power. And by calculating the duration of Rohani's mandate, the Syrian Diaspora's pessimistic predictions regarding the continuation of war, destruction, and massacres for years to come might not be wrong.
The nuclear file and ambitions are merging in one front with the chemical weapons in Ghouta and the Revolutionary Guard's management of sectarian fronts along the course of Syrian devastation. In the meantime, the calls of the opposition National Coalition are getting lost between the mazes of the catastrophic vacuum affecting American leadership, and the Russian rush to seize the great legacy. For our part, we can only expect further waiting, in the hope that the Geneva 2 conference will be staged some day and will be up to the expectations of Arab-UN Envoy Lakhdar Brahimi. The latter – although from afar – is still wagering on the exhaustion of the fighting parties, and was only frustrated yesterday by the chemical gases in Ghouta.
Between a submissive American who is merely trying to save his own skin and a greedy Russian retaliating for the wretched legacy of the Soviet Union using Syrian blood, the question is: Who committed genocide at dawn, so that the opposition can falsify the pictures?