Muhammed Rushdi Sharbaji
The United Nations’ policy in Syria is very problematic and it entices doubts.
Apart from the constant concern of Ban Ki-moon which incited a lot of criticism and mockery.
Limiting the intervention of the United Nations during the Syrian Revolution to supervision of local truces between Assad regime and Syrian revolutionaries is not an innocent enterprise.
United Nations is considered the most prominent manifestations of the times following the Second World War.
The League of Nations, founded in 1920, failed to stop the outbreak of the Second World War. Following that, American President, Roosevelt in 1944 called for the ‘Four police’ (China, Soviet Union, United Kingdom, and United States and France) to set a work plan for a United Nations that is functional and so it was founded on 24 October 1945.
United Nations was founded after resolving the dispute over Veto right and limitations among major world powers.
An American commenter who attended the foundation conference of the united nations said that without there would be no United Nations without the Veto.
United nations is an entity which aims to enhance the position of the victorious allies and manage power equilibriums between them. Hence, it’s not functional.
It’s more of a false witness to big massacres occurring since its foundations until this point. The Palestinian plight is one example and now the ongoing Syrian massacre.
United Nations in cooperation with United Kingdom legitimatised dividing Palestine in 1947 to an independent Arab state and a Jewish state.
They declared Jerusalem an international city. That was starting point of Arabs’ catastrophes in the modern history. The Middle East would go through a non-ending turmoil from that point onward.
The United Nations was supposed to resolve the conflict; however, it only established an aid and relief committee; the UNRWA in 1948 for the Palestinian refugees.
In Syria, United Nations’ approach was similar to that of Palestine.
Ban Ki-Moon, as representative and Secretary-General of the United Nations, expressed his concerns and called on fighting parties to calm down instead of holding Assad regime accountable and lobby against him to leave power since he committed genocides according to United Nations itself.
When the Syrian revolution entered the armed stage, the United Nations changed its discourse regarding Syria to calling ‘all parties to take responsibility and stop violence.’
International envoys and representatives of the United Nations mission to Syria were very honest about their work and the institution’s approach and that is to preserve the interests of world powers in Syria.