Seems as if supplying Syrian rebels with arms just isn’t enough. The US government and its Western allies are about to unleash direct military force in the small Middle Eastern country. We have heard the drumbeat of war for a long time – now as early as Thursday bombs may start falling on Syria.
Instead of regime change, we are told, US military forces just seek to “send a strong message” to Syrian president Bashar al-Assad to stop (apparently) using chemical weapons. A humble, non-interventionist, foreign policy is no good — to be humanitarian we must bomb other populations. This rhetoric is championed by a number of war hawks on the Republican side of Congress as well, namely John McCain, Lindsey Graham and US Senator Bob Corker.
What’s under-reported in the US media, however, and what is likewise being pushed under the rug by US officials, is how other nation-states are responding to the news. The United States along with Britain and France have been warned by Russia (which supplied arms to the Syrian government, not the Western-backed rebels, mind you) and China (which has stated that the US is just rushing to conclusions again, citing no evidence of chemical weapon use) that more military interventionism in the Middle East will have catastrophic consequences for the region, is unnecessary and will harden relations among the economic powers.
They may very well be right. Iranian officials have responded to increasing war rhetoric by stating that Israel will be attacked with the full force of the Syrian military and with full support of the Iranian government (and possibly Russia) if the West intervenes.
What is unfolding before our eyes is how states relate to one another. Economic powers such as the United States, Britain and France are facing off against other nation states with growing power and influence in the world: Russia and China. The Middle East has long been under occupation and coercion from hegemonic western foreign policy — now Russia and China want to increase their influence in the region now too. It is all coming to a head.
The modern era is one of total war. Technological supremacy has created weapons capable of total destruction. Though advanced states are not involved in military war with one another, there is absolutely a changing of the guard occurring. Direct conflict among powerful nation states is not necessary — that is what third world nations are for. Power is shifting away from the west. Nation building has failed and of course it would — nation-building is a central policy of state and not conducive of spontaneous liberated markets. The West, as any state, does not want to cede any power. So it is marching into a direct confrontation with rising powers at the expense of us all. Eastern states also crave power because all states do. We should absolutely be weary that these powers will stop at nothing to become as omnipotent as possible. States place hegemony over survival.
As a human being I dissent. I dissent because states have failed. Their failure has resulted in the murders of countless members of our human family. States are unnatural. They are centralized institutions of force and violence. States ignore the fundamental aspects of co-operation seen in the anarchic, spontaneous, symbiotic work of human beings and all of nature. I dissent because I must. As the 20th century witnessed the rise of the wartime state, the 21st will surely see its dismantling. The creative labor of human beings will build markets, mutual aid, relief, decent societies and finally peace. We can and will build a real and lasting peace that will make life on Earth worth living — a peace for every child of humanity.
The greatest moment in human civilization is within our grasp. It is time to reach out and attain liberty.
Translations for this article:
- Portuguese, Paz Real e Duradoura.
Citations to this article:
- Grant Mincy, A Real and Lasting Peace, Before It’s News, 08/28/13