Blix: Even if Assad used chemical weapons, the west has no mandate to act as a global policeman

[muriel_volestrangler]

An article by Hans Blix in the Guardian:

It is true that the UN security council is not a reliable global policeman. It may be slow to take action, or paralysed because of disagreement between members. But do we want the US or Nato or "alliances of willing states" as global policemen either? Unlike George Bush in 2003, the Obama administration is not trigger-happy and contemptuous of the United Nations and the rules of its charter, which allow the use of armed force only in self-defence or with an authorisation from the security council. Yet Obama, like Bush and Blair, seems ready to ignore the council and order armed strikes on Syria with political support from only the UK, France and some others.

Such action could not be "in self-defence" or "retaliation", as the US, the UK and France have not been attacked. To punish the Assad government for using chemical weapons would be the action of self-appointed global policemen – action that, in my view, would be very unwise.

While much evidence points to the guilt of the Assad regime, would not due process require that judgment and consideration of action take place in the UN security council and await the report of the inspectors that the UN has sent to Syria – at the demand of the UK and many other UN members?

We may agree with John Kerry, the US secretary of state, that the use of gas is a "moral obscenity", but would we not feel that "a measured and proportionate punishment", like striking at some missile sites or helicopter bases, is like telling the regime that "you can go on with your war but do stay away from the chemical weapons"? And what is the moral weight of the condemnation by nuclear weapons states of the use of gas as a serious war crime when they themselves will not accept a norm that would criminalise any first use of their own nuclear weapons?
...

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/28/chemical-weapons-west-global-policeman

[treestar]

1. He has some points there

Then again, if some nation were to gas a minority, and the international community includes states like Russia and China that don't give a damn - what is to be done?

And the nukes can't really be used, not unless all nuclear powers were on the same page, in which case, it makes them global policemen, which is actually a good thing if they limit themselves to that and not just out and out colonization of non-nuclear powers.

This is one of the benefits of the world "losing" the USSR. The nuke club doesn't include states with PTB that are so lacking in morality they don't condemn attacks like this.

[JoeyT]

6. Normally we don't give a damn either.

Which is part of why we don't have a mandate. You can't selectively enforce laws and expect people to take you seriously. Either the law is the law no matter what, or there is no law.

[treestar]

13. I think we do

I actually do think we give a damn.

[corkhead]

2. Mandate? We don't need no stinkin' mandate

[bigtree]

3. of course, the admins objections are not just about the chemical weapon attacks

. . . they're really just pretext to justify a more direct military response to removing the Assad regime itself.

We saw almost zero response from the Obama administration to earlier reports which had the rebels engaging in chemical attacks.

[KG]

12. seems they waited to see who was gonna win, and jumped in on that side.

[Dustlawyer]

4. We have killed as many or more innocent civilians with our Drone program. They are just

as dead. How many innocent civilians did we kill in Iraq and Afganistan?
Lets cut our military budget in half, fix our infrastructure, our educational system, bolster SS and Medicare, and enact single payer!
I know ya'll must be tired of me saying this but, lets have the big war here at home by marching and voting for candidates that promise to enact COMPLETE CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM (CCFR) including Publicly Funded Elections! Candidates not beholden to the lobbyists from the MIC, Wall Street, Insurance, Big Pharma and the oil companies would actually Represent us, the people! Since these industries have had the laws written for them by the politicians who owe their position to these greedy, heartless, soulless, corporations and spoiled billionaires, they will fight like hell against us. They have been preparing since OWS caught them off guard. This time, lets get some direction from some leaders who can keep the focus on just this issue. It is the root cause of most of our problems anyway. With our Reprentatives in office we can address our other issues and start to fix the damage caused by the special interests!
Can we start the movement here at DU? Who agrees with me on this?

[Tiredofthesame]

11. I agree with you.

I agree with you, and I'm sure many here do as well.

But this thread is about Syria, and the upcoming strike that most likely will happen.

Best thing you can do is scream from the mountaintops in your personal space to anyone who will listen, about the atrocities committed against the Constitution.

Problem is, as of right now, there are more sheeple than people.

Most people, for some reason, react instead of pre-act. Think of all the people you know who only go to the doctor when sick, or only teach their kids anything after they have misbehaved, or get stuck in a life they don't want until the shit hits the fan. These sheeple are the key to a revolution. And I don't mean a violent one. The system can be fixed from the inside only. Warren, Sanders, Udall, Wyden, Grayson, Sherrod Brown, and the many others who have not lost their voice in congress, who have not succumbed, to the way Washington currently operates, are the key to victory.

"Strength in Numbers" means something to me. There are more of us than there are of them. Someday, hopefully sooner than later, I hope to see not Democrats and Republicans, but an US vs THEM mentality. We will never be truly free in a system where the powers that be can hire one half of the slaves to kill the other half. All while dividing and conquering us with the illusion of Freedom and Democracy.

[Dustlawyer]

14. I did hijack the thread a little, ok, a lot. To me though, I see this looming war with Syria that

is opposed by a majority at home as another symptom of our corrupt election process. Our government will keep the MIC happy at our expense. Our government will keep the gun lobby at our expense, Wall Street, Big Pharma...
The politicians you mentioned are all true Representatives of the people. The problem is twofold, there are not enough of them for one, and with a few exceptions, they will not come out to the American people and call bullshit on our election process. They need to be organizing us. I do not believe we can work this through the system, i.e. elect enough REAL Progressives to turn the tide. The money and power dangled in front of them changes them and they will do anything to stay.
If we could have a majority of Congress made up of people like Bernie Sanders, Elizebeth Warren, and Alan Grayson I would not have a rant in the world. As it is we are running out of time ecologically, and going backwards socially! I am already at US vs. THEM and I agree that we have more numbers if we could just get the disconnected to connect. There is also the matter of the brainwashing by the national media that hides the true state and nature of things.
As for Syria, I am deeply saddened that those poor people are caught up in the mad international power struggle. Our intervention will probably make the death toll and human misery rise even higher than if we do nothing.

[jwirr]

5. We tried to tell them that in the 70s but those that rule were sending the jobs all over to

other countries and we were after the oil. They did not listen because they had other goals. They could care less what is happening in the world if it does not somehow link to their goals. If we stopped buying the junk and used alternatives they would be the first to complain about military spending. As to who they are? Stockholders, MIC, etc.

[Coyotl]

7. "To punish the Assad government ... would be the action of self-appointed global policemen"

"To punish the Assad government for using chemical weapons would be the action of self-appointed global policemen"

[QC]

8. What is he? Some kind of Yurpeen socialist?

[ConcernedCanuk]

9. "global policeman" is the wrong term - USA/MIC are global bullies.

.
.
.

However, I find it interesting the use of the term global policeman.

I had a friend from China in a MSN chat room over a decade ago - she raised the question;

"Who ever elected the USA as the World's global policeman?"

Answer I messaged back?

USA did.

CC

[Faryn Balyncd]

10. Sometimes slow & dysfunctional is better than misinformed & trigger-happy.