As the canker of religious, tribal, criminal and mindless demagoguery that passes for politics in the Middle East reaches yet another zenith, this time in Syria, some of the Western world’s
leaders are once again rattling their sabres and priming their muskets. Despite the fact that America and its misbegotten coalition already has untold litres of innocent blood on its hands because of its recent misguided aggression in the Middle East,
these lunatics now talk of military action over Syria.
Why does America have to take it upon itself to act as world policeman? Why does the United Kingdom in all its military decrepitude have to follow? Why
does the Prime Minister of Australia, in the middle of an election campaign, try to distract voters by involving himself in the war of words and threats of action in that benighted sand-blown country?
This coalition of aggression has not been formally asked to intervene. Indeed, should it do so without such request it will be violating – once again – the
territorial integrity of a sovereign country.
And we wonder why the peoples of the Middle East hate us.
This is a regional problem. Let the region sort it out.
The real question of course is the Syrian
stockpile of chemical weapons. The coalition of aggression justifies military intervention by citing pre-emptive defence reasons. Tragic shadows of Iraq hang over that argument.
With reference to this supposed stockpile, it behoves the Western World to seriously, and it should mean seriously, threaten the lugubrious and moribund United Nations to take strong, assertive
action on the matter.
This should be the supreme test for the UN. Should it fail, as it has so many times
before, it no longer deserves support. To this end, its real backers and bankers – being the Western World - should withdraw its complete support and create a new and effective entity to replace it.