Despite Syria’s ongoing conflict,
life in many parts of the nation goes on. Syria’s election schedule is
no exception. The last parliamentary elections before the latest held
this month were in 2012. Since these elections are held every 4 years,
the recent elections were far from a “political stunt” to bolster the
legitimacy of the current government, but instead represented the
continuity of Syria’s ongoing, sovereign political process.
Attempts to undermine the credibility of
the elections have become the primary objective of US and European news
agencies, however, even the US government’s own election monitoring
nongovernmental (NGO) agencies have conceded the last presidential
election in 2014 saw soaring voter turnout, and despite attempts to
leave voter turnout this year omitted from US-European press reports, it
appears to also have been high.
The Washington-based, USAID-funded “Election Guide” reported a 73.42% voter turnout in
Syria’s 2014 presidential election, a turnout that would be astounding
had they been US elections. Voter turnout for the 2008 and 2012
presidential elections in the US, for example, were 57.1% and 54.9%
respectively. The 2016 Syrian parliamentary elections appear to have
also enjoyed a high turnout, with the International Business Tribune in
its article, “Syria Elections 2016 Updates: Geneva Peace Talks Resume Amid Scrutiny Of Country’s Ballot Process,” reporting that:Voting hours for the Syrian parliamentary elections Wednesday were extended for an additional five hours because of such a high voter turnout. A religious leader there lauded the number of voters participating, saying that it was an indication to voters’ apparent opposition to the “cruelty, terrorism and destruction” experienced in Syria’s civil war.
Despite high turnouts in previous
elections and indicators like that reported in the International
Business Tribune regarding this latest poll, US papers like the New York
Times (NYT) decided to sidestep facts and intentionally indulged in
unconfirmed, anecdotal stories to portray turnout as low as possible and
the credibility of the elections nonexistent.
Anne Barnard’s questionable NYT article titled, “Syrian Parliamentary Elections Highlight Divisions and Uncertainty,” claimed that:
Large parts of the country that are controlled by insurgent groups did not participate in the voting on Wednesday. Despite a fragile partial cease-fire, government and Russian warplanes have continued to hit areas controlled by nationalists and Islamist rebels, as well as territory held by the Islamic State, also known as ISIS and ISIL. An American-led coalition is also bombing areas held by the group.
Throughout Barnard’s NYT piece, she
categorically fails to inform readers that while the geographical areas
“controlled by insurgent groups” might be “large,” the majority of
Syria’s population does not reside within them, and clearly chose to
vote in large numbers both in 2014 and 2016 for the current government.
Claims that Kurdish regions also did not
participate, omitted the fact that Syria’s total Kurdish population is
less than 10% of Syria’s population and that not all Syrian Kurds reside
in these regions and refused to vote.
Dispelling the Displacement Myths
It is usually the US that reminds the
world of Syria’s displaced population. What it often doesn’t mention is
the fact that most of these displaced Syrians have not fled abroad
either to Turkey or Jordan or further beyond to Europe, but have instead
sought safe haven in Syria’s capital of Damascus and the protection of
its government and the Syrian Arab Army.
The US-EU-funded Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC) would reveal precisely this in its 2012 report, “Syria: No safe haven – A country on the move, a nation on the brink,” stating:
Syria’s two biggest cities Damascus and Aleppo were seen as safe havens from the violence and gradually saw a large influx of IDPs [internally displaced persons] fleeing from the zones of conflict.
It is clear that the majority of Syria’s
population are fleeing from US-EU backed “freedom fighters” and seeking
sanctuary under the protection of the “regime” Western powers have
attempted to convince the world led by villains. With this in mind, poll
results in favor of the ruling government should be of no surprise,
despite rhetoric circulating in US-European media.
The West’s Worst Fears Confirmed
This reality confirms the West’s worst
fears, that despite all attempts to divide and destroy the modern
nation-state of Syria, the people remain relatively united in cause to
restore peace and order within the nation, and to do so with the current
government leading the way.
It is also ironic that the United States
and Europe endlessly expound the virtue of self-determination but now
attempt to undermine an exercise in that very self-determination by the
Syrian people.
It is clear by the statements made by
the United States and several European nations regarding the recent
elections that the problem was not necessarily the manner in which the
elections were held, but who they included. It was not candidates Syrian
law excluded from the elections, but candidates the United States and
Europe simply do not approve of. In other words, the US and Europe are
doing precisely the opposite of promoting self-determination in Syria
and are in fact attempting to undo or otherwise undermine the
credibility of the results of the recent elections.
NPR in an article titled, “Parts Of Syria Vote In Parliamentary Elections That Critics Say Are A Sham,” would report that:
Mark Toner, U.S. State Department deputy spokesperson, said this week that “to hold parliamentary elections now given the current circumstances, given the current conditions in the country, we believe is at best premature and not representative of the Syrian people.”A French Foreign Ministry spokesman called the elections a “sham,” while his German counterpart said that country “will not accept the results,” Reuters reported.
It should be remembered that the US and its European allies eagerly supported elections held in Ukraine amid
fierce fighting in the nation’s easternmost region. Despite the
inability or unwillingness of many in Ukraine to vote, the elections
were both held and recognized by the US and Europe. The reason for this
hypocrisy should be clear. Those running in Ukraine’s elections were
candidates the US and Europe approved of, supported, and knew would win,
while those running and most likely to win in Syria’s elections are
not.
Thus, “democracy” from an American or
European point of view, is more about special interests in the West
selecting a foreign nation’s future government, not its people, unless
of course, the people can be convinced to back those candidates
Washington and Brussels supports as well.
Not only does the recent election in
Syria confirm the West’s worst fears of a failed campaign to divide and
destroy the nation, casting doubts on the viability of installing a
Western-friendly regime into power during the proposed “transition,” but
rather than exposing the alleged illegitimacy of Syrian democracy, it
is the West’s brand of selective meddling and manipulation of polls that
has been laid out for all the world to see.
With any luck, Syria may serve as an
example for other nations to follow in resisting and overcoming foreign
interference in their domestic political processes.
Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
The original source of this article is New Eastern Outlook
Copyright © Tony Cartalucci, New Eastern Outlook, 2016
Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page
No comments:
Post a Comment