Syria - Their point of view

Today, the UN General Assembly met to discuss the draft resolution that is meant to prevent armed conflict in Syria . Watch the video here :   http://bcove.me/wm846nfs

At around 26 mins mark ( up to 42mins) , the Syrian representative Bashar Ja'afari spoke before the vote on the resolution in order to defend the current government. I found his points very persuasive and valid, so I decided to make note of them on my blog in order to shine some light on the Syrian situation as it is viewed in the eyes of those that the West opposes. Here is the point form paraphrased summary.

• Ironic Paradox: The states sponsoring this resolution are submitting it under item 34, the prevention of armed conflict. These same states play a major role in sponsoring the rebels with arms, as was acknowledged by foreign minister of France.  Arms come from Qatar and Saudi Arabia and other states through Turkey. American arms also are coming in through Turkey.
• These states provide financial support to the media and intelligence campaign against the current government.
• The focus of these states is to support the the rebels and unilateral sanctions rather than providing humanitarian assistance, which in itself is a breach of six point plan.
• No humanitarian aid has been seen on the ground
• This Saudi draft resolution, which is on one side is sponsored by Saudi and Qattar and Bahrain, which are one of the world's worst human rights offenders and on the other side is sponsored by the states that continually disregard UN resolutions themselves and mold the resolutions to their advantage in order to military intervene in the affairs of other sovereign nations under pretense of WMD removal or the giving of humanitarian aid.
• The actions of these states in Iraq, Libya and some African countries have contributed to the weakening of  Rule of Law at international level.
• Assad government have caught rebels that are associated with Al-Qaeda, which means that the countries that are supporting the rebels cause are indirectly supporting Al-Qaeda at the time that they continue their rhetoric against terrorist around the world.

Of course, this speech is biased. However, it definitely brings out some interesting points to think about .  One point we should agree on with Syrian government is the delivery of humanitarian aid to the Syrian people, while largely staying away from involvement in the armed conflict. At this time, we are left to wonder as to why we are supporting the rebel forces if they can't even make a united front on the matter. If Assad is beaten, the country is most likely to to be divided in fractions that fight against each other. This is a worse fate than  than having one "dictator". Assad was in power for years before the backlash from his people, which should be noted started with peaceful protests. Mass atrocities are not usually defied with peaceful protests,  thus there is a possibility that there weren't such major mass atrocities or the people would uproar in a much different manner. In any case, the living situation for average Syrian was better under Assad's government, than the current living situation where the whole economy of Syria came to a screeching halt.  Plus the rebels have done many questionable actions since the upraising and still do not have a united front against Assad, so what makes them a more viable form of government exactly? Perhaps without Assad, the civil war will just turn into sectarian battles for power and territories. Before we try to throw out Assad, we need to make sure there is a better option for Syrian people and at this time, the divided rebel groups cannot prove that they are it.

must see video : CBC's The Turning Point :Syria