The possible attack, considered to be an illegal intervention bypassing UN Security council, will be a direct violation of international law.
Two days ago, US President Barack Obama said that he had “no interest in an open-ended conflict with Syria” and that he favours a “limited” action against the Bashar al-Assad government to stop them from further usage of chemical weapons.
The statement came at a moment when UN chemical experts and investigators were still at work. Although the US President had said that the intelligence had stated of chemical weapons’ use by the Syrian government, he is yet to show the proof of the same.
Last night the UN investigators and chemical experts left Damascus for, what is speculated to be a route to Lebanon, rather than going back to their hotel. It was just a couple of hours after Obama’s reiteration that the US was planning a “limited narrow act” against Syria.
The speculations have arose of a drone attack by the US quite soon.
The possible attack, considered to be an illegal intervention bypassing UN Security council, will be a direct violation of international law.
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has said his country will defend itself against any Western “aggression”.
While France has reaffermed its stance of supporting US, a number of Syrian neighbours are opposing the possible US action with Russia and China. Although UK has been voted out of any military alliance, there still are countries who will try to gain from a war-like situation.
The situation becomes grim with US Secretary of State Jhon Kerry backing Obama making it impossible for him to trace his steps back, in case he decides to do so, as it would embolden the dictators in Iran and North Korea leaving US looking weak.
As Mark Mardell’s words remain valid till now, the slope to war has started appearing to be very slippery. The question is whether Obama will slip through or try to find a rough patch to save the world from another war?
