An article in El Pais recently attracted my full attention. Similar articles can be read every other day, but that´s precisely what disturbs me the most. People may not die, but individuals are deprived from their basic rights, and that´s also a kind of war for me: ongoing instability and fear haunting the legitimate inhabitants of a territory. And the situation is getting worse: clashes between Palestinians and settlers have increased in the West Bank in recent months, with a radical fringe of Israelis (settlers armed with guns and other kind of weapons!) attacking Palestinian property, including olive trees (according to OCHA, approximately 100,000 Palestinians are economically dependent on these trees olive) and cars. Couldn't that also be considered by the ICC as a war crime? Food for thought...
Visiting Scholar for the Carnegie Middle East Center´s Sami Moubayed has got it all right. His magnificent article Brahimi won´t risk his reputation in vain highlights the poignant truth about of one of the most serious mistakes the international community (and particularly both the UN and the League of Arab States) has made since the breaking out of the conflict: choosing the wrong mediator. And taking into account the many many (many) things at stake, it really shocks me why nearly nobody stressed that fact earlier. Appointing an special envoy to show unity/consensus and be able to speak to Assad? Great idea. Not bearing in mind what was exactly needed? Failure. Even though he will have to face several setbacks, let´s only hope Brahimi´s appointment somehow clears the path of the Syrian mess... His advantages, as presented by Moubayed: He is "the man who helped end Lebanon’s civil war, who managed Iraq’s troubled post-Saddam elections, and propped up Hamid Karza...

Comments
Post a Comment