BLOODLESS OPTION: Troops from Islamic countries, including Malaysia, will establish order in the country
THE
world has been discussing for days whether Syrian President Bashar
Al-Assad used chemical weapons. It is becoming increasingly clear that
he did. More important, however, is the absolute destruction that has
gone on for the last three years and, even more surprisingly, that much
of the world has remained silent in the face of it.
This
silent element is apparently not troubled by people being killed and is
unconcerned by which weapons they are killed with. These are people who
never turn to look at Syria even once, as almost nothing is left
standing in the country, as millions of people are living as refugees in
neighbouring countries, as murder and torture become an every day part
of life and as, according to United Nations reports, more than 100,000
people have died.
We
must not forget that a military intervention, especially a narrow and
limited action, will not solve anything in Syria. What needs to be
performed first is a rescue operation, and for the funds set aside for
war to be directed to supporting the refugees.
Millions
of dollars spent on ships, missiles, jets and bombs could be spent on
rescuing the Syrian people and settling them in neighbouring countries.
That rescue is essential to stop even one person from being harmed.
On
the other hand, an American military intervention would probably cause
even more pain. We need to see that the regime in Syria slaughters its
own people without compunction, and that this regime has been bombing
its own territory on an almost daily basis for the last three years. Now
the United States coming in and raining bombs down on Syria will change
nothing. The main aim in Syria, where hundreds of people are dying by
the day, must be to stop the killing, not to punish Assad.
If
the price of punishment is to be the deaths of civilians yet again,
then nobody of good conscience and common sense can back it. Therefore,
the wickedness in Syria must be stopped in such a way that not another
single person is additionally harmed. There are two basic issues in
Syria: the first is stopping the killings by the Ba'ath regime.
The
second is the building of a Syria that supports peace and tranquillity
in the wake of that evil. Both can only be realised through intervention
by Islamic countries.
Although
the US emphasises that it has no such intention, it will be perceived
as an invading power by many groups in the region and will encounter
some reaction. Moreover, the limited intervention it would make will not
be enough to weaken Assad.
Scores
of groups are active in Syria, with new ones springing up regularly,
and it does not seem possible for the US to reconcile these and
establish order.
However,
if Islamic countries act together, this can all easily be established. A
battalion of troops can be taken from a large numbers of countries --
such as Turkey, Pakistan, Malaysia, Indonesia, Morocco, Algeria,
Tunisia, Qatar and Saudi Arabia and, most essentially from Iran -- and a
kind of Islamic peace force can be set up very quickly.
It
will be easy to put an end to the killing by entering Syria from 70
points. This force, supported by the US, the European Union and
particularly Russia, can quickly ensure pacification in Syria.
This
union made up of troops from Islamic countries will act as a peace
force and enter Syria to protect the civilian population, not to wage
war. The tanks will roll forward to establish peace, not to fire shells.
The
Muslim population will feel secure since the advancing troops are
themselves Muslims and will welcome those Muslim troops with joy. Since
Iran will be part of this union, sectarian clashes can easily be
prevented, and since Russia also supports it, the regime's forces will
quickly surrender.
The
order to be established once the bloodshed has been stopped must be a
system equally represented by people of all sects, all faiths and all
ideas.
All
groups must abide by God's command in the Quran that "it is better for
you to forgive" and contribute to the establishment of a democratic
Syria.
No
matter how accurate the bombs and missiles may be, it is inevitable
that there will be civilian casualties. What is the logic behind
preferring such a bloody solution when we have a decent, kind, and
bloodless one available that is compatible with the Quran?
0 comments:
Post a Comment