Bombadierung des Flüchtlingslagers in Nordsyrien: Kollateralschaden, Kriegsverbrechen und Schutzzonen

Bombadierung des Flüchtlingslagers in Nordsyrien: Kollateralschaden, Kriegsverbrechen und Schutzzonen

Teile der UNO und des Westens beklagt die Bombadierung des nordsyrischen Flüchtlingslagers in Sarmada in Nordsyrien als „Kriegsverbrechen“.Was bei US-Bombardements als Kollateralschaden durchgeht, soll nun bei Assad und Russland ein Kriegsverbrechen darstellen und Schutzzonen rechtfertigen. Da eigentlich nur Assad und Russland neben der Anti-IS-Koalition über Luftwaffe verfügt, scheint die Anklage gegen Assad und Russland gerichtet zu sein. Dennoch sollte man einmal die Vorwürfe und die Motive prüfen und auch die sich daraus möglicherweise ergebende Forderung nach der Errichtung einer Schutzzone. Hier noch Kommentare von mir aus der Diskussion mit einem US-amerikanischen Bekannten:

„Why should the Russians and Assad´s airforce want to kill civilians?Because they like to kill civilians? That doesn´t make any military sense.Maybe it was what the US calls a collateral damage as they often happen when the US military is involved, but not called a war crime as in this case. If US bombardements kill civilians, it´s called „collateral damage“, if Russia and Assad are doing the same, it´s called a „warcrime“.Russia as Assad have an interest to focus on the military and logistic structure of the Islamist jihaddi groups they fight.Maybe parts of these refugee camps are part of that structure.

That would be the same as when the Chrisitian Phalange militas killed many civilians in the Palestinian refugeecamps in Beirut 1982 with the support of Israel and the USA. However, nobody blamed Israel and its bloody butcher Ariel Sharon for that or the US goverment,The PLO had also embedded its military and logistic structures in the refugee camps in Shatilla and Sabrina in Beirut.The Phalange militias knew what their youth organization was doing and the Israeli military sat near the refugee camp and watched the massacre and didn´t intervene, but tolerated it. However the Christian militias didn´t only kill so many Palestinans just for military purposes, but also as revenge for the assasination of their prime minister including old people, woman and even babys.The CIA and the US goverment cancelled all relations with that militia , because what they supported was the elimination of the military structure and the fighting groups of the PLO in these refugee camps, but not a butchery and manslaughter of innocent civilians, However; They made it possible.  A good movie about this episode is „Waltz with Bashar“ which is an Israeli selfcriticial refelction of these past massacres.But it is intersting what happened to these brutal Phalange militias which in Arab countries became damned for their Israel connection–my American friend wrote;

„The men led by Elie Hobeika and Mohammed Fehm simply wanted to kill as many Palestinians as possible, men, women, children, babies. This was not the Phalanges themselves, but a militia composed of extremist youth. CIA which had contacts in the past with Hobeika about Hussein Fadlallah and Imad Mughniyeh immediately broke of all contacts with him for ever. Not so Hafez al Assad who received Hobeika in Damascus some months later, which showed the hypocrisy of Syrian government support to the Palestinian cause. Hobeika was eventually assassinated with a bomb under his car. The culprits were never found, mostly because no one wanted to find them. Hafez Al Assad supported several attempts to kill Yasir Arafat, including through „Colonel Moussa“. He supported a pseudo Palestinian fighting group, as-Saiqa, whose leader Zuheir Mohsen spent more time at the Monte Carlo casino than fighting the Israelis.“

Rebels or terrorists often embed military structures in their civilian structure–look at Hamas in Gaza which deploys rocket launchers in kindergarten. However, when Israel is attacking these position, there are no protests, but if Assad does there is an outcry.. The next question is: Will the West set up protection zones which will be defended militarilly.?Turkey and Merkel have proposed this. Turkey wants the Turkish military to protect this zone in order to create its own sphere of influence in Northern Syria and as first step for an Neoosman empire, mostly against the Kurds and as next step to march with Turkey-supported jihaddis and Muslimbrothers to Damascus and topple Assad and establish a Neoosman Islamic dictatorship.

Next question;Who should protect such a protection zone? The UNO, the USA, NATO, Turkey, Turkey embedded in NATO or UNO troops?? And how to manage the conflict that this protection zone would be a basis for all the anti-Assad-rebels and jihaddis who will lead their war from within this protection zone. How to prevent that Russia and the Syrian army is getting into a conflict with the defenders of this protection zone?   But you should answer my question: Should because of this bombardement of the refugee camp a protection zone set up?

Mathew Geiger wrote about the motives for the bombardement of the refugee camp: „Sure it does: if you make the lives of people totally miserable, they will submit Assad’s rule in order to gain security and stability. It’s not, because they like to kill civilians, but it is part of a traditional military tactics that had been used before the Geneva Convention. It also has the benefit of making your enemy able to establish control over contested territory while it discourages public support for rebels.“

Probably the exact opposite will happen, Those civilians will hate Assad and join the ranks and files of the rebel groups and the jihaddis just to get revenge and to protect themselves.That´s what all Islamist and socalled „moderate“rebel groups want to achieve: Provoke Assad, get more victims and killed civilians that nobody can have a safe life anymore, but will join the jihaddi and rebel groups, Polarize as much as you can.

And what was the story about the body count in Vietnam? The US military had statistical goals for the daily elimination of Vietcong soldiers. However, the US military killed hundred thousands of innocent civilians which they declared as Vietcongs or Vietcong collobaroters. The body count zones were perceived by the Vietnamese as mere killing zones.If Assad is also thinking in the criterias of body count zones and perceives any civilian as a collobarator, this would be similar to the former US strategy in Vietnam. However besides barrel bombs which are more an indicator that the Assad regime is running out of ammunition for its airforce I haven´t heard such a claim by the Western powers.

Kommentare sind geschlossen.