RUSSIAN direct intervention in Syrian Civil War has allowed Assad regime to regain the initiative by mounting series of offensive operations. For the first time since war begun, there is a real chance that Assad might just emerge as a victor and survive to govern Syria for another day. However, his victory comes at a price for the Syrian population.
This is especially true for people of Aleppo. As one of the most important battleground in the war, the civilian there suffered heavily as a result of urban warfare that has raged on since the second year of the rebellion in 2012. The latest episode of suffering happened just last month as Assad and rebels fought for the northern part of the city.
This tragedy was followed by allegation that Assad is using indiscriminate weapons – and thus, according to some, effectively ‘slaughtering’ his own citizen. A series of protest emerged worldwide including here in Indonesia. Some protests were rational in which they tried to galvanize humanitarian support for the victim.
Nevertheless, some other was irrational in which they pushed international community to depose Assad. For sure, some of us surely wonder why it took so long for international community to do something in Syria. After all, they moved quick enough to oust Gaddafi in 2011 right. So, why they do nothing these days?
A bit immoral (or inhumane) isn’t it to watch millions dying and suffering while we stand by watching and doing nothing?
WELL, I do not think so. The thing about morality is that it got no universal or absolute standard. Whether what one does is moral or immoral will always open for debate. There is no universal standard of rightness or wrongness. Right or wrong was, is, and will always be relative based on one’s perspective.
That said, contrary to some of your opinion, I believe that it is immoral to depose Assad in this condition. Yes, I agree that the humanitarian tragedy is regrettable. However, one has to keep in mind that it still could be worse and one of the best ways to stop it from getting worse is by giving Assad free hand in Syria – and that is what Obama does now.
How can we come to a different conclusion? Why some believe it is better to act and oust Assad while other believes it is better to let him rule Syria? Well, as said earlier, it all comes to the different standard we are using.
For some, morality is defined by the intention. Put it simply, the right thing to do is the one that comes from sincere intention. In this situation for example, the right thing for liberal interventionist like Hillary Clinton is to intervene and defeat Assad forces. It is the right thing for them because they always care for humanity and human rights. And the humanitarian crisis does happening all over Syria now.
Just like Mrs. Clinton, neo-conservatives like Bush family, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, etc also questions Obama’s quality for standing idly and doing nothing. They want Obama to act harshly and decisively against Assad. Partly it is because of their concern regarding American indispensability and partly it is because they want to promote democracy and freedom. So, the right thing to do is to intervene since there are no democracy and freedom there.
And just like Americans (and Western Europeans as well), some Indonesians are quite idealistic when it comes to morality. “It all depends on the intention,” many Indonesians will conclude to differentiate the right from the wrong. It is pretty simple and straightforward.
