It is a pity that in the face of international opposition US President Barack Obama thinks nothing of publicly reaffirming his belief that a “limited and proportional” strike against Syria must be carried out. He made this amply clear at his press conference at the end of the G-20 Summit in St. Petersburg on Friday.
Not heeding the appeal of UN Secretary-General Ban-ki Moon and other international leaders gathered in the Russian city, the US leader announced that on Tuesday he would make the case for an attack on Syria in an address to the American people and promised that the US would find allies in this enterprise in spite of the negative outlook of staunch ally Britain, as well as Russia.
In a dinner speech to the leaders of the G-20, the UN Secretary-General noted without ambiguity that international military action against any country would be legal only if sanction for it came through a resolution of the UN Security Council. But the President of the United States made it known that he holds the Security Council in contempt.
He said at his news conference, “If we were not asking for a response (against Syria), this is not what everybody would be asking. There would be some resolution proffered in the United Nations, the usual hocus pocus, but the world and the country (Syria) would have moved on.” This is deploying pretty strong language to show disrespect to the world body created to maintain world peace.
The US is a key member of the international system which is committed to the UN Charter. If its highest functionary can be so dismissive of the UNSC, it would be futile to expect other countries to follow the rules, and a display of hypocrisy on the part of the world to expect terrorists and other non-state actors to heed rules of civilised conduct.
Mr Obama was categorical that the world cannot wait on the United Nations, and that the Security Council was “in a state of paralysis” on the Syrian issue. This is simply not true. What’s true is that members of the UNSC have considered the Syrian crisis and differ with America’s approach. The US knows its warlike moves will be vetoed in the Security Council. But it cannot tolerate dissent and is determined to have its way in disregard of the rules of international behaviour. If any other country had taken the kind of path being advocated by the US President, America would have used its power and influence to have it declared a pariah. The US is making a serious mistake and the world will have to pay for it unless Washington is restrained.