SYDNEY, Australia – All this fear-mongering about Syria’s alleged use of chemical weapons distracts us from the real tragedy which is that Syria was coerced into giving up its chemical weapons in the first place.
Chemical weapons are called ‘poor man’s nukes’ for a reason. If these admittedly horrible weapons were ever actually used, we wouldn’t be talking about casualties in the tens or hundreds, we’d be talking about tens of thousands dead, and that’s because they were always configured as a strategic deterrent to counter “Israel” which possesses both nuclear and chemical weapons.
In 2001 Syria shot a Scud-B missile from Aleppo to just short of the border with “Israeli” occupied territory to demonstrate their capabilities, which the Zionists later openly acknowledged. Disarming Syria has been a major strategic priority for “Israel” and the United States ever since then, which they achieved in 2014 when the Pentagon claimed to have overseen the destruction of 581 tonnes of Sarin, apparently the entire stockpile.
Scud missiles have payloads between 600-1000kg so that’s many hundreds of chemical warheads that Syria had pointed at the nuclear reactors, airports, and military installations inside “Israel”. When Iraq used chemical weapons against the Iranian army offensive at Al Faw in 1986 they inflicted around 8,000 casualties according to the CIA in the space of two weeks, and that was Mustard gas, whereas the Sarin that Syria possessed was many times deadlier.
I hope for the day when all weapons including small arms are looked upon as a barbaric remnant of our violent past as a species, but the demand that Syria disarm themselves of their strategic deterrent when they have an aggressive colonising entity like “Israel” on their doorstep amounts to leaving them vulnerable to aggression by the same gang of predatory regimes that imprisoned the global majority during the colonial era.
If racism is the combination of prejudice and power, and if that power stems from a history of European colonization (in the context of global power relations), then there’s nothing more racist than the imperial left’s obsession with stripping post-colonial states of their power, leaving them vulnerable to neo-colonial aggression.
At least right-wing racism by contrast is honest about its desire to recolonise the global south, whereas left-wing racism destroys countries in the name of saving their people.
The following article was made by Jay Tharappel, a PhD Candidate at the University of Sydney and a Syrian specialist.