US military action in Syria in third week of Sept?

---

Zaglul Ahmed Chowdhury The United States is likely to strike Syria militarily in the third week of the current month even though President Barack Obama continues to face mounting pressure for not taking such an action, amid a clear division among the world's powerful nations. The president is seeking US congressional approval before the strike; he has already crossed the first hurdle to his action plan. On his part, Mr Obama has never said that he would not launch the military strike if the Congress rejects his plans. But he is, at least, trying to be respectful to the parliament (US Congress) which begins its meeting on September 9 after the recess. The United States was expected to launch the air and missile strikes last week in Syria, responding to the alleged use of chemical weapons by Bashar al-Assad regime there. But he put on hold any military action there after the British parliament had rejected prime minister David Cameron's proposal to strike at Syria. The just-concluded conference of Group of Twenty (G-20) 20, representing major global economic powers in St. Petersberg in Russia, was overshadowed by the Syria conflict, with the global leaders failing to reach any consensus on the crisis. President Obama sought to rally support in the conference for his planned military action in Syria. His position was staunchly supported by France and some other nations. But the host of the conference that was essentially purported to for discussing economic issues, Russian president Vladimir Putin who is the main international backer of Syrian regime, appeared to have garnered more support against an American assault. China broadly supported Moscow's view while India and several other countries felt that any attack on Syria without an incontrovertible evidence of Damascus's complicity in the use of poison gas, would complicate world scenario. The European nations are against the Assad regime. But they are not in favour of approving the military attack on Syria. President Obama was initially unwilling to get his country involved in Syria despite his administration's supporting the rebels against the regime. But he is now veering towards attacking Syria, without involving the ground forces in the assault. He feels the Syrian regime has crossed the "red line" by using chemical weapons against its own people and considers that this warrants a tough American response. He has received an approval from the relevant Senate committee, in favour of an attack against Syria, albeit by a thin margin. He is now looking for the decision by main Senate and the House of Representatives. The US is haunted by the scars of prolonged wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that were initiated by Mr Obama's predecessor George Bush. Hence, most Americans are believed to be against getting involved militarily in another country, afresh. Nevertheless, Obama administration, probably, can not shy away from the challenge of attacking Syria as the issue has appeared as the most critical one in his nearly five-year long presidency so far, in two successive, each being of four-year-term, electoral tenure. It is like a double-edged sword for the US president -- acting against the will of most people at home and abroad, on one hand, and "punishing" an errant autocrat for using gas in the 28-month-long civil war that has claimed more than 0.1 million (1.0 lakh) lives, in addition to displacing about 2.0 million (20 lakh) Syrians, on the other. The focus on the Syrian conflict is now clearly on the US military strikes. But many also believe such strikes would be against international laws. The UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon and the UN Special Peace Envoy on the Syrian conflict, Lakhdar Brahimi, have said that a military assault on Syria would not be consistent with UN charter without the world body's approval. Russia and China are the two key allies of Syria and are certain to "veto" any UN Security Council moves against the Assad regime. President Putin has said that he would support UN actions against Syria if the Assad government's real involvement in using poison gas is fully established, beyond any shadow of doubt. Damascus and its allies including Russia and Iran say that the use of gas was done by the Syrian rebels and their backers including Israel to find out a pretext for foreign involvement in Syria. The US is under pressure from its Middle East allies like Israel, Saudi Arabia and Turkey to act against Syria. Now all are keen to know the full report of the UN inspectors who visited Syria to investigate into the incident of the 'gas massacre' that killed more than one thousand people including children. The US Secretary of State, John F. Kerry, said Assad's 'involvement in the crime in "undeniable" and as such, Washington has a duty to act militarily. The US intelligence says more than 1400 people were killed, in the wake of the use of chemical weapons. Obama administration needs to go through some process in the US Congress -- which, however, is not mandatory, before acting in Syria. Even though the assault looks certain, it may not finally occur at all. However, such chances do appear at this stage to very slim. It is also possible that the military measures will come earlier than expected to catch the adversaries unaware. The third week of the September seems to be a plausible timing for making an assault on Syria. But nothing can be predicted for certain now. (e-mail: zaglulbss@yahoo.com)