1. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/20/us/politics/on-mideast-heads-spin-over-shift-in-diplomacy.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0&ref=todayspaper
2. Category of Problem: War/Peace in Middle East
3. Level of Problem: Worldwide
4. This Article Concerns: President Obama's next plan of action in negotiating with Syria (shift in diplomacy)
5. Importance/affect on families/individuals: To maintain superiority, control and influence over the Middle East region, the West has placed corrupt Arab leaders into positions of power and supported the over throw of those that are not seen as favorable. This has served to keep their populations at bay, in return for militarization, power, and personal wealth for the elite. The underlying theme here is the struggle to control important resources such as oil that are abundant in the region. You have a suppressed population of individuals that view U.S. influence as a major cause of the current problems in the Middle East, which has lead to a rise in Islamic militancy, acts of terrorism, and anti-West sentiment, anti-U.S. in particular. Each day many lives are lost over the current state of unrest in this part of the World. Each day other parts of the world receive threats as a result of this unrest. The Middle East has the entire world on pins and needles waiting to see what will play out next. The outcome of what is happening in Syria could be life changing on many fronts for families and individuals across the world (economically, socially, emotionally). If we go to war, many lives will be shaped by the absence of a loved one. If we go to war, the safety of our country is compromised. If we go to war, the stability of our country's economics are weakened. This is true for both parties in the pursuit of a resolution, we are all in jeopardy, we are all fighting for what we believe is right.
6. My input: There has been talk in Washington of President Obama strategically using a significant amount of pressure on Syria to face the deadlines we have proposed to account for and surrender its chemical weapons stockpile. The U.S. has presented a serious threat of military strike against Syria and also proposed the risk of loosing its last ally, Russia. I personally agree with Mr. Rhodes' comment that, “The common thread is that you don’t achieve diplomatic progress in the
Middle East without significant pressure,” Benjamin J. Rhodes, a deputy
national security adviser. I appreciate Mr. Obama giving these countries time to settle this issue before engaging in military action. But I do fear, like most skeptics, that Mr. Obama does run the risk of being dragged into long negotiations and constant games of hide and seek that ultimately could result in little change from the status quo. The president’s hesitance to pull the trigger on Tomahawk strikes on
Syria nearly two weeks ago, and the public and Congressional rebellion
at the idea of even limited military strikes, I do believe were unmistakable signals
to the Syrian and Iranian elites that if diplomacy fails, the chances of
military action ordered by the American president are slight. So in short, I feel that in giving Syria the time to cooperate we are running the risk of further military delay (no repercussions for Syria for the inital gas attacks of August 21st). This conflict is keeping me on my toes! I hope Mr. Obama is able to play his cards right during the next few weeks.
No comments:
Post a Comment