In diplomacy, it pays to make haste slowly. In statecraft, the application of rational, human intelligence has more merit than the use of military force or the threat to use force, which violates international law and humanitarian law.
For the avoidance of doubt, in international law, the mere threat of the use of force or the actual use of force is tantamount to an act of aggression.
In international humanitarian law, it is unlawful to make threatening statements that send fear, panic and despair among innocent citizens, who are then forced to seek refuge as political refugees.
Threats of aggression, which cause social dislocation is actionable by the people, who have suffered forced displacement.
In international law, “aggression is the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State. Regardless of whether or not there has been a declaration of war, the following are acts of aggression: (a) the invasion or attack of one State by another State, or any military occupation, or any annexation by the use of force of the territorial integrity of another state; (b) bombardment or any use of force by one state against another sovereign state; (c) the blockade of of the ports and coasts of a state by armed force of the territory of a state; (d) attack by the armed forces of a State, on the land, sea or air forces, or marine or air fleets of another state,(e) operating from the territory of another state for the purposes of attacking another State; (f) sending armed gangs, or groups, irregulars to foment trouble in another state or the use of mercenaries to carry acts of aggression against another state or the substantial involvement of a state in the internal affairs of another state”. (Pietro Verri)
There is also psychological aggression, which involves the use of hostile broadcasts, press war and the beating of drums of war to destabilize the citizens, especially threatening to use military force.
The Soviets used this tactics in Berlin during the Cold War.
Obama’s speech to Americans on the Syrian crisis depicts the conscious application of his mental abilities. In fact, it is a taxonomy that construes covariance into different perspectives that can lead to a diplomatic solution, rather than the butcher’s solution, being canvassed by Senator John McCain and the French President Hollande.
Human intelligence, when applied properly produces rational judgment, unlike archaic theories of military intelligence, which dispense wicked, inhuman suggestions that lead to destruction of human beings and cities.
In the Syrian crisis, one can see that there are social humans with misplaced consciences, who recommend murderous adventures because they are goaded by superiority complex and hatred for their adversaries.
“None are so empty as those, who are full of themselves” “All over the world there is much law but little justice.”
There is also too much doubting in the in Russo/American diplomatic relation, since the days of the Soviet Union.
Reagan’s regular statement each time he met Gorbachov was “doveriem nor praveriem.
It is true that one cannot relish a boiled egg in which one has expressed doubt. However, people may become fanatics when they doubt everything.
Political pundits of the extreme right express austere views.
These propagators of human misery should look back into history and see how the human agents of satan have persistently destroyed souls, in circumstances of utmost brutality.
Politicians dress up in fine suits, meeting endlessly at conferences, while soldiers are put in harm’s way in battlefields.
One day, the military worldwide should question the judgment of their political leaders before going to die for unjust causes stoked by the ego of political leaders.
Pacifism is being mocked, by hawkish political elements in America. They chide President Obama for not rushing into war in Syria.
The Geneva meeting between Kerry and Sergei cannot resolve any substantial problems. Their statements are hortatory and not binding, since these statements bear no jural imprimatur.
“ In times of danger, enemies become friends” The Russians say,” Let your enemy in, so that you can keep him out.”
Requesting Syria to put its chemical arsenal under international control is only a half-measure. For this measure to be legal and binding, Syria would have to be put under consular jurisdiction or under the regime of capitulation.
These measures are not applicable in civil wars but could only apply, if Syria had suffered “debellatio”after an international war with foreign states, in which it was defeated.
We must delineate the application of the law of armed conflict as it applies to a neutral State or a state that is not a party to the conflict.
The application of international instruments ratione materiae and ratione personae by belligerents in a civil war and international armed conflicts must be apprehended.
An armistice, which Lavrov and Kerry appear to attempt to establish, cannot bring a contentious civil war to end.
The rebel forces are disappointed that the US has mellowed its stance. The Sunni revolt does not seem to have proved successful.
Also, there are arms dealers, who must accept my condolences. What shall it profit a leader if he orders the murder of innocent children, women and children, while his own live in comfort?
God is not mocked, whatever leaders sow, they shall reap.
The diplomatic option is rational, humanitarian and just. The human agents of satan are happy to engage in ghoulish enterprises because their hearts are deep and full of wickedness.
Who engineered the use of chemical weapon during the Iraq/Iranian war?
Who used napalm bombs in Vietnam? What happened at Dien Bien Fu?
Who massacred people in the Dutch territory, for which they compensation is now being paid.
Wickedness has been man’s inheritance. It is not enough to rein in Syrian’s chemical weapons. Those, who preach righteousness, must insist that general disarmament must be the panacea for world peace.
For some states to possess dangerous weapons while insisting that others hand over theirs seem hard to apprehend or reconcile.
Iran, North Korea, Syria and other states that use the “Quia Timet” argument insist that they are acting in self-defence.
If every state is acting in self-defence, who is the aggressor?
Let there be a UN-supervised election or a referendum to determine, who the people will choose as their leader in Syria.
If, however, it is the national policy of any state that Assad must go, then all present efforts may end in the wilderness.
Yesterday, 11th September 2013, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs building in Libya was bombed by revolutionary, anti-Gaddafi elements, now asserting their revolutionary stamp on “democratic” Libya.
In “democratic Iraq”, there is the peace of the graveyard. In Syria, there will “peace and democracy”.
When the cacophonic voices of rebellious jihadists, take over in Syria, I will go marching in.
American commentators are reeling over the statement to the American people by Putin in response to Obama’s speech, which was published in the New York Times on 11/9/2013.
It was hard-hitting and an unusual frank talk in New York Times.
There is too much chorusing among journalists, who simply repeat what opinion leaders have put out. It is no surprise; therefore, that Putin’s statement has raised eyebrows in America.
I have no quarrel with people, who think that they are special. I think that we should all try to be special. I am very special. I am fearfully and beautifully made by Jehovah Adonai. You can heck me out.
War and peace will remain con
tentious issues. I will always be on the side of peace and against war-mongers, against pride and prejudice.
