Vision Between Two Scenes
Attitudes towards the events taking place in Syria are full of differences that may be the decisive point between what had happened before and what may come after, not according to the judgments and actions, but on the basis of the establishment of precedents that will find themselves contradictory perhaps to the extent of cancellation with reality, and also contradictory to the level of impairing the international work rules, morally and politically.
Who works under the pressure of political passions, especially in international organizations “that are supposed to have sublime mission” certainly the results will be deviated and politicized in its findings and also in its conclusions.
According to this perspective, the work of the international organizations will be unprofessional and immoral and far from what is happening on the ground of events, organized terrorism and supported by known states.
Human Rights Council was a blatant model of precedents in dealing with the events in Syria and adopted several politicized and selective decisions which were not entirely balanced. The council depended on media reports and fabricated certificates without checking the information that were based on false certificates of persons who have hostility to Syria and the Syrian people.
The legal logic demands international organizations of the United Nations and other human rights organizations to deal with the Syrian government, and hear what it has of documents and evidence against terrorism and terrorists and explain what is happening.
What happened to the Human Rights Council that it did not listen or respond deliberately to official invitations by the Syrian government to ascertain and verify of what Syria has of proofs that expose and condemn states and parties that impose their power on international organizations.
The Council has ignored the basic rules in the legal work and the fact that his vision was through forged certificates. So how can it, in this case, work professionally and impartially?!
Terms of success of the Human Rights Council are not available in Syria because of the dominance of the U.S. on its decision, and therefore these decisions can’t be accepted.
On the contrary scene: there are international organizations and human rights that don’t accept the political siege imposed on others, and refuse to politicize the work, such as the International Commission for Human Rights, whose president visited Syria, where he confirmed that he came to see reality as it is, away from the media fabrications and political agitation led by Washington.
And the results of his visit to Syria, saying that the International Commission of Human Rights doesn’t accept foreign attacks on any people and there is no international law prescribed for such violations carried out by foreign parties against the Syrian people.
The difference is clear in dealing with the crisis in Syria between a politicized organization that receives its orders from countries and parties with an interest in the continuation of the crisis and shedding the blood of the Syrians and another organization that puts her hand on the origin of the problem which is the smuggling of weapons and militants into Syria to kill the Syrians.
How long those countries would remain playing a negative role in the Syrian crisis and when to stop funding, training and supporting for terrorists!
The speech of President Bashar Al-Assad on January 6 at the Opera House in Damascus have revived hope – according to the Syrians- in the presence of a political solution, where the speech has represented a national and political project based on a deep vision and understanding of the Syrian reality and more importantly that the project is Syrian without external interference or dictating agendas and solutions that do not understand the nature and the reality of the Syrians.
It is still hoped to find a way to implement this political project which suspends terrorism and returns to Syria its balance and position.
Ahmed Orabi Baaj
Translated by: Sh. Kh.