When the people beyond America cheered the
victory of an American presidential candidate in 2008 who evoked the words of
Gandhi, “Be the change you want to see,”
the cheer was a sigh of relief, hoping that the world will get rid of the
Bush’s recklessness in foreign policy.
Obama was awarded the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize
even before locating where all the White House bathrooms were; for sure it is a
demanding and deeply uncomfortable position. “Perhaps the most profound issue surrounding my receipt of this prize is
the fact that I am the commander-in-chief of the military of a nation in the
midst of two wars,” Obama said in his acceptance speech. He was elected on
a wave of anti-war, economic crisis and contempt for George W. Bush over Iraq,
but now finds himself dragging U.S. and the World to what could be worst than
Iraq.
Just a decade after the Iraq invasion Obama is
facing the choice himself to start another war or not? A war where the Nobel
Peace Prize winner Obama might be fighting side by side with… al-Qaeda. Analysts
warn that even a short-term engagement, most likely a couple of days of missile
strikes, could draw the U.S. into the kind of “dumb” war Obama opposed; an illegal
and reckless intervention, which was something that he railed against in his
2008 campaign.
The Syrian intervention is a choice between vigilantism and the rule of law. Certainly, in many cases, vigilantism is generally easier, and sure, it can save lives in the short run. But each time it is allowed, it erodes the rule of law. So, the question here is, in the long run, which one of these choices will save more lives?
It is not an easy choice, it is time for Obama
to stand up and be the change he proposed and break this cycle of wars. When
Hillary Clinton left the office as the secretary of state, we had something on
the table that looked like a solution for the Syrian conflict called ‘Geneva 2’,
a follow up of the Action Group on Syria, which met in Geneva in June 2012. The
whole process was a rare phenomenon since the dawn of the Cold War; the U.S and
Russia were working together towards resolving a complicated multi-layered sectarian
and religious conflict. Now again it sounds like a fairy-tale.
Its time for him to standby with the commitment
of the Geneva meeting on Syria, “Action
Group members are committed to the sovereignty, independence, national unity
and territorial integrity of Syria. They are determined to work urgently and
intensively to bring about an end to the violence and human rights abuses and
the launch of a Syrian-led politicalprocess leading to a transition that meets the legitimate aspirations
of the Syrian people and enables them independently and democratically to
determine their own future.”
One cannot deliver peace, human rights and
democracy on cruise missiles. I hope Obama’s presidency does not turn out to be
one of those ‘amazing trailers of a bad film’.
