Nato won't intervene in Syria

2011-10-31 22:55

Tripoli - Nato ruled out the possibility of military intervention in Syria on Monday but said Damascus should draw lessons from Libya, where Nato-backed rebels won a civil war that resulted in the killing of long-serving leader Muammar Gaddafi.

Western powers have been tightening sanctions on Syria but have shown no appetite to repeat their Libyan operation in the Middle Eastern nation where protesters have demanded outside protection from a crackdown that has killed 3 000 people.

Speaking during a visit to the Libyan capital Tripoli, Nato Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said military action in Syria was out of the question.

"My answer is very short. Nato has no intention [to intervene] whatsoever. I can completely rule that out," he told reporters.

"Having said that, I strongly condemn the crackdown on the civilian population in Syria. What has happened in Libya sends a clear signal. You cannot neglect the will of the people.

"You should accommodate the legitimate aspirations of your people and work towards democracy."

Months of protests have failed to dislodge Syrian President Bashar Assad, creating an unstable stalemate in a country sitting in the heart of the Middle East.

Assad warned the West over the weekend that meddling in its affairs would cause an "earthquake" in the Middle East where his country borders Israel, Lebanon, Turkey, Iraq and Jordan.

In Libya, Nato military intervention played a decisive role in toppling Gaddafi, the third Arab leader to be overthrown after the revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt. Gaddafi was captured and killed near his home town of Sirte on Octocber 20.

  • marco.tomaso - 2011-10-31 23:40

    And why not NATO?Is it because President Bashar Assad can mobilize his 400 000 troops that can match NATO where as Gaddafi couldn't and lost the support from his troops?The Syrian Army is loyal to Assad where as the NTC were c**k***king Gaddafi regime defectors. Syria has many friends and supporters in the Region where as Gaddafi had nobody for support in his Region.Lebanon,Iraq,Iran all have bilateral unity,moral and financial support between them.Not so long ago Syria along with Iraq and Lebanon joined in support of Iran's nuclear programme. It looks like the Arab Spring is slowly coming to a halt now?Syria is the one place where the Arab Spring revolution did not take its full course completely and was stopped dead in its tracks.Bashar al Assad had looked at Libya,Tunisia,Egypt,Jordan,Oman,Yemen and Bahrain and he managed to maintained the balance of policies whilst keeping himself in power. Some of Assad's reforms he made were:He lifted the emergency law and reformed almost every single ministry or department of the government. Every single university student in Syria were told they would pass this year.Absurd,but it meant him getting the attention of students in Syria and giving them rewards so as to not protest. Assad's use of force was immense,brutal but so far effective.The difference with Gaddafi was that the Libyan protests quickly turned into armed Rebellion.Gaddafi's troops were also indisciplined,disloyal and demoralized hence why so many defectors.

      Chikukwa - 2011-11-01 06:43

      double standards?

  • cosmos.ndebele - 2011-10-31 23:42

    Because Syrian crude OIL is very heavy and dirty....whereas Libyan crude is one of the best in the world.....

  • Dante - 2011-10-31 23:43

    In Syria they have killed 3000 civilians/protesters.How many Libians were killed before Nato intervened? And Nato wants us to believe they did it for the people of Libya...

  • Paul - 2011-11-01 03:52

    Because 85% of european oil is refined in Syria and they cannot bomb their own refineries. Typical western hypocrisy.

  • Ngime - 2011-11-01 07:57

    Double standards!Where are the morals in this instance?

  • pages:
  • 1