Friday, September 6, 2013

Human Rights Groups Don't Agree on What to Do About Syria

With such a complex issue, obviously there are many sides to the debate. One of the things I found most interesting was that there were Syrians who actually wanted the US to launch missiles in Syria. And after reading their reason for wanting that, I can definitely see where they’re coming from; after all, it is better to live with a little bit of hope that a strong foreign country will eventually cause a change in the current corrupt government, even if said country is killing fellow countrymen, than to live with none while people are still dying.

However, I still do not fully agree with the fact that the US, or any country for that matter, should launch missiles; after all, we have been making strides as a society on the path of nonviolence, and once again resolving to such an extremely violent measure rather than looking for less horrific options definitely does not sound very appealing to me. I agree with the school of thought that believes that we should instead convince the Russians and Chinese, Assad’s two strongest supporters at the moment, to change their views. Perhaps (well, probably) violence will lead to results, but is that a risk that we are willing to take? Do we want to be held responsible for Syrian citizens’ anger if even more helpless people die while nearly nothing in the government changes?

Furthermore, what is going to happen to the even greater number of refugees? Ms. Fakih brought up a very good point when she talked about how powerful countries should focus on helping those millions of refugees in Syria and its neighboring countries. Why have we let this gross breach of conventional human rights continue unhindered until a chemical attack? Nations with the power to change should already be working with the UN to aid the displaced, not just beginning on that path. I think it’s terrible that we have not already been helping more refugees, and the fact that now Obama is ready to missile innocent people is shocking, and not in a good way.

1 comment:

  1. Yes, this is certainly a horrible conundrum - but there are other non-violent things that can be done too. For example, stopping the arms flow from Libya into Syria. Bombing is one solution, but I think there must be more.