Aleppo - UN an UNSC
 

What is happening in Syria? is one of the most intriguing questions in the international arena. Not because there is no record of happenings but because of different narratives of the events. As usual, if you are going to understand Syria conflict from a TV channel like RT, you would end cursing the hegemonic interests of US along with dubbing Arab proxies enforced under nationalistic and sectarian sentiments. While looking at this unending conflict from a US news agency's narrative, you would find Asad crushing innocent people of Syria in collusion with Russian devilish policies. ISIS may remain common in both the narratives. But at this vary moment, if we speak about recent events taking place; Aleppo is burning in the ashes of multidimensional conflict, enforced and caused by Sectarianism, International-Politics, Proxies and extremism. Now the question, this thread has been started for, is: "Why UN and UNSC has remained subdued to extinguish these flames over the innocent masses of Aleppo?". I hope, this thread, unexpectedly, would at least be responded with even some abstract outlines. Question in simple again; Why UN and UNSC has failed to resolve Syrian conflict in common; Aleppo, in particular. Many Thanks.

before coming to your question , an update : UN to pass resolution against Israel's move to build settlements in occupied Palestine. Israel asked the USA to veto. Trump tweeted : we should veto.

same is with syria , UN was not able to play any role because two veto powers were against each other : the USA and Russia. Unless both agree on anything , UN is in wait and watch state.

syrian conflict is at three levels .
1) A civil war, where the USA supply arms against ASSAD as the USA dont like ASSAD for being close to Russia.
2)Terrorism : ISIS vs All , not sure who supply ISIS bank roll, may be usa and suadi still have softcorner for it.
3)proxy: Russia and USA . why ? cause Russia what to prove its political leadership and also that she is loyal to its allies (ASSAD). And USA fear Russia's role could increase its dominance in oil rich middle east and world at large.

Coming to media: we all know media is only tool to spread propaganda . Free media is myth .Native americans were killed in protest against pipeline but CNN didnt showed it. I still wonder where did white helmets vanished. Russian media is state controlled as is Chinese, so its agenda is very clear promote states view only. however, american media is american establishment controlled we saw that in Election 2016.

[QUOTE=LUTUF ALI;993428]before coming to your question , an update : UN to pass resolution against Israel's move to build settlements in occupied Palestine. Israel asked the USA to veto. Trump tweeted : we should veto.

same is with syria , UN was not able to play any role because two veto powers were against each other : the USA and Russia. Unless both agree on anything , UN is in wait and watch state.

syrian conflict is at three levels .
1) A civil war, where the USA supply arms against ASSAD as the USA dont like ASSAD for being close to Russia.
2)Terrorism : ISIS vs All , not sure who supply ISIS bank roll, may be usa and suadi still have softcorner for it.
3)proxy: Russia and USA . why ? cause Russia what to prove its political leadership and also that she is loyal to its allies (ASSAD). And USA fear Russia's role could increase its dominance in oil rich middle east and world at large.

Coming to media: we all know media is only tool to spread propaganda . Free media is myth .Native americans were killed in protest against pipeline but CNN didnt showed it. I still wonder where did white helmets vanished. Russian media is state controlled as is Chinese, so its agenda is very clear promote states view only. however, american media is american establishment controlled we saw that in Election 2016.[/QUOTE]

Obviously, multidimensional issue, Proxies, Oil-politics, the game of hegemony, terrorism and civil war etc. are the determinants of Syrian conflict. Now, how to stretch and term the UNSC's role in this conflict or even in all others. Can we say: UNSC and UN are merely figureheads? What about other members of UNSC? Is liberalism in International Politics a fiasco? and Can Realist approaches still be justified?

[QUOTE=De Despot;993435]Obviously, multidimensional issue, Proxies, Oil-politics, the game of hegemony, terrorism and civil war etc. are the determinants of Syrian conflict. Now, how to stretch and term the UNSC's role in this conflict or even in all others. Can we say: UNSC and UN are merely figureheads? What about other members of UNSC? Is liberalism in International Politics a fiasco? and Can Realist approaches still be justified?[/QUOTE]

I personally believe in realist school. USA talk about Human rights remember Mala, but than what about millions in Palestine and Syria.
So yes Realist view could explain here is how:
Russia want to maximize its power and influence to increase security. the USA want to maintain its power. it is struggle for relative gains that realist talk about, not the absolute gains that institutional liberal promote. As end of ISIS have absolute gain for the usa and saudi as well but it will have relative gains to Assad and russia .


PS: i believe Liberalism is what they tell other to do, realism is what they do. Do as we say not as we do.

moreover UN is flawed fundamentally, its charter give all states equally member of community , yet some states have veto power, ie contradicts itself.
it even cant work without veto as big power fear small states lobby against , and those big powers contribute much of funding for UN.
only international political system that can work well is balance of power. We are in age of new balance of power in formation. The USA losing its grip allowing multi-polarity to emerge. however due to economic dependency this multipolar world will be much more connected than ever in past.

[QUOTE=LUTUF ALI;993439]moreover UN is flawed fundamentally, its charter give all states equally member of community , yet some states have veto power, ie contradicts itself.
it even cant work without veto as big power fear small states lobby against , and those big powers contribute much of funding for UN.
only international political system that can work well is balance of power. We are in age of new balance of power in formation. The USA losing its grip allowing multi-polarity to emerge. however due to economic dependency this multipolar world will be much more connected than ever in past.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=LUTUF ALI;993437]I personally believe in realist school. USA talk about Human rights remember Mala, but than what about millions in Palestine and Syria.
So yes Realist view could explain here is how:
Russia want to maximize its power and influence to increase security. the USA want to maintain its power. it is struggle for relative gains that realist talk about, not the absolute gains that institutional liberal promote. As end of ISIS have absolute gain for the usa and saudi as well but it will have relative gains to Assad and russia .


PS: i believe Liberalism is what they tell other to do, realism is what they do. Do as we say not as we do.[/QUOTE]

Sometimes Realism seems to be the crux of international politics. Mainly due to failure of UN. However, we can't squarly undermine the liberal premises of international mechanism. Economy, in many ways, has begun to lead the international political powers. Post-Cold War nuclear disarmament and NPTo like things still make some difference and materialize the Liberal interpretations of International Politics.
I think Trump presidency would alter the conventional force of International Politics.

Nuclear disarmament! did they disarmed ? article 6 of NPT require NPT states to completely disarm in good faith, they hadnt yet. NPT is only way to enhance their nuclear dominance by restricting non-nuclear states from achieving nuclear weapons (power in other words) and have monopoly in nuclear energy market.
the usa further violated NPT, which restrict any nuclear state from transferring nuclear weapons or fuel to any non nuclear state, today Turky and many other European countries host nuclear weapons of the USA.

only achievement liberal got is human rights got legal shape , and free trade agreement . though the later had increased inequalities and poverty .

[QUOTE=LUTUF ALI;993444]Nuclear disarmament! did they disarmed ?....poverty .[/QUOTE]

Obviously, you are right. Not everything is moving according to the formal and legal lines of international laws. But, despite this, the world has seen a dramatic decline in nuclear production. At one stage there were enough nuclear warheads to destroy this world completely. Undoubtedly, International system still runs on lopsided wheels but at least things have been labelled with their legitimate names. How far would the violation of laws stretch in this globalised world? Not today but yesterday we could have been invaded by a superpower state without their having legitimate cause to invade, irrespective of looking for fabricated justifications.
Well, the main cause behind this manipulation of established laws still remains thirst of power and hegemony. Sometimes I wonder if really cold war ended in 1991 or it just shifted to another track with a new version of strategies and tactics.

[QUOTE=LUTUF ALI;993428]before coming to your question , an update : UN to pass resolution against Israel's move to build settlements in occupied Palestine. Israel asked the USA to veto. Trump tweeted : we should veto.

same is with syria , UN was not able to play any role because two veto powers were against each other : the USA and Russia. Unless both agree on anything , UN is in wait and watch state.

syrian conflict is at three levels .
1) A civil war, where the USA supply arms against ASSAD as the USA dont like ASSAD for being close to Russia.
2)Terrorism : ISIS vs All , not sure who supply ISIS bank roll, may be usa and suadi still have softcorner for it.
3)proxy: Russia and USA . why ? cause Russia what to prove its political leadership and also that she is loyal to its allies (ASSAD). And USA fear Russia's role could increase its dominance in oil rich middle east and world at large.

Coming to media: we all know media is only tool to spread propaganda . Free media is myth .Native americans were killed in protest against pipeline but CNN didnt showed it. I still wonder where did white helmets vanished. Russian media is state controlled as is Chinese, so its agenda is very clear promote states view only. however, american media is american establishment controlled we saw that in Election 2016.[/QUOTE]
I really appreciate your analysis can you please shed light on what should be the solution to syrian conflict.
Thanking you in anticipation