Friday, September 27, 2013

Blog #3: U.N. Deal on Syrian Arms Is Milestone After Years of Inertia

The 5 permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have agreed on a resolution to rid Syria of its Chemical weapons. This comes a surprise when a few weeks ago the US was on the brink of taking matters into its own hands claiming that there was no way forward in the Security Council for gaining support. The resolutions lays out a plan for Syria to be completely rid of all of its chemical weapons and all of its chemical making equipment. It also forbids Syria from importing or exporting any chemical weapons to any of its allies. This resolution also had a global impact because the United Nations agreed that chemical weapons are a threat to the global peace. This sanction is being looked upon by some, as the new way to handle such matters. For Syria this sanction is legally binding and failure to abide by the terms outlined gives the Security Council the power to take measures under Chapter 7 of the United Nations Charter. The United Nations and all involved seem particularly pleased and confident about the outcome and the direction in which things are moving. The timeline is aggressive, by mid-2014 Syria should be rid of everything. By November inspectors will go forth and examine claimed chemical weapon sites. On the flip side,  the Security Council fears that Russia may use its veto power to give Syria more time and therefore lengthening the process. This makes people reminisce of the 1990’s when the UN tried to rid Iraq of its weapons. The Ultimate goal would be the lifting of all sanctions to leave the countries to do as they may.

 From this we can see that history repeats it self. As we try our best to rid Syria of its weapons we have to think of the effect it will have on the U.S, Syria, and the rest of the world. But we also have to think of the Syrian people. How does affect them? We'd like to think that we're doing the best in everyone's interest but what we really should concentrate on is what's best for the Syrian people and their safety and then think about the rest of the world. I say this because the Syrian people are caught in the midst of what the Syrian government is doing and they don't have much of a say in how it affects them. We can see the physical effects, but do we really know how it affects them socially,economically, mentally, etc.. I'd like to think that if the US was ever in a situation like this that the countries trying to help solve the problem would think of these factors. With the ultimate goal for fully ridding Syria of its chemical weapons with the hope of leaving the country to continue to live its life, would we ever think about going bad to help the people? I can only imagine that after an incident like this that things won't get better for the people right away. So should we stay to help progress Syria as a new country with a fresh start?

Kateland Patino

No comments: