Last week I suggested that there would be a number of very interesting things to watch over the week in regards to Syria. So let's follow up... Last week I said,
1."Watch for the discussion about the democratization of foreign policy"
David Cameron has had to play a new hand after his devastating loss in the House over whether or not Britain would participate in military strikes in Syria. Cameron has had to accept that Britain will play a critical role in humanitarian and peace keeping efforts rather than taking the more aggressive posture that I think he believes is necessary. He has said that he would support the Americans if they decide to strike Syria and reports suggest that Britain has been looking at ways to provide "further non-lethal support" for action against Syria. Such statements remind me of the old joke about the British police force. In chasing down suspects it is said that a British bobby's only line of defence is to shout, "Stop or I'll say stop again." Britain has been made much weaker on the political stage by this vote.
2."Watch as Russia portrays itself as a cooler head."
Russia has remained staunchly opposed to any action in Syria because Russia has interests there and because Russia remains hostile to the U.S. Apparently the cold war is not over. Putin has said that any action taken without the approval of the UN Security Council would be against international law but it is extremely unlikely that he would use Russia's vote on the Security Council to take action against Syria. This is kind of like saying, "I won't clean up my property unless the local council says I have to," while at the same time holding one of the deciding votes on the local council.
3."Watch to see if Barak Obama chooses politics over democracy"
Since last week Obama has decided to be both a politico and a democrat while at the same time appearing to be neither. His decision to go to Congress for approval, ostensibly to show the resolve of the entire U.S. political elite was motivated, I suggest, for a different reason. If he decided not to go to Syria he would have been called weak but by asking Congress, Obama ensures that the final decision does not have to rest with him and any failure in Syria would not rest on his shoulders alone. He has thrown down the gauntlet by saying that while he believes he has the authority to act on his own he wants Congress to endorse the strike and not "sit on the sidelines and snipe." As of Friday morning 59 percent of Americans oppose unilateral U.S. action. So a decision to move forward may mean that Congress has to act against the democratic will of the people.
4."Watch to see where Canada is in the debate"
It is clear that Canada is on the sideline in the debate on Syria. Stephen Harper did not call Parliament back to discuss Canada's role and he seems to be letting John Baird, Foreign Affairs Minister, do a lot of the talking on this. It is interesting to see what he is saying, particularly on Russia. Baird argued that, "...Russia's intractability to work with others on this issue that's in some respects the heart of the problem. The Russian government's moral, political, material support to Assad has given him the ability to soldier on and this crisis is going into its 30th month. So the comments [Putin] made of late, I think, are empty and hallow...." Baird went on to say that the Canadian government agrees that there needs to be a "moral response." Baird is making the case that while a military strike is the correct moral response, the situation is complicated by an international community still in the throes of old Cold War politics.
5."Watch to see the story about moral obligation versus politics"
While the political games are being played there is still the story of the human beings who are dying or who have died because of chemical weapons. Nothing about this truth has changed since last week.
The debate remains complex and it continues to require our full attention.
