The Yemeni Civil War: The Persian Gulf’s Humanitarian Crisis

 

Introduction

The civil war in Yemen has raged on for six years, creating one of the world’s biggest humanitarian crisis in the 21^st century.  Influenced by various historical, political, cultural, economic, and social dimensions, the Yemeni Civil War has grown into a multifaceted conflict that involves local, regional, and international actors and institutions.  The role and policies of the United States in Yemen is essential to the continued trajectory and conclusion of the civil war. The Yemeni Civil War is a perfect case study into 21^st century humanitarian disasters in conflict zones given various dimensions that influence the course of the war, the overwhelming evidence of crisis within the country, drawing in the international community and US response, and possible solutions to end the conflict.

Background

            Yemen has a troubled history that influences the unresolved nature of the Yemeni Civil War.  Since Yemeni unification in 1990, the country has never entirely erased the religious, cultural, and political differences that have resulted in armed conflict in 1994 and from 2004 to 2010 (Laub & Robinson, 2020).  Between 1990 to 2012, Yemen’s leader was Ali Abduallah Saleh, a former military officer accused by various human rights groups of running a corrupt and autocratic government (Laub & Robinson, 2020).  Saleh was subject to an overthrow during the 2011 Arab Spring by political and military rivals that failed; however, mounting international pressure forced Saleh to resign in 2012 after receiving promises of immunity from prosecution (Laub & Robinson, 2020).  Vice President Abd Rabbu Mansour Hadi stepped in as interim president as part of a transition deal brokered by the Saudi-led Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), the United Nations, and the United States (Laub & Robinson, 2020).  The GCC and UN-brokered National Dialogue Conference (NDC) effort failed as various Yemeni factions moved to armed conflict to seize power by 2014, unable to resolve their differences.

            According to Laub and Robinson (2020), there are several reasons for the widening rift in Yemen between 2012 to 2014 that caused the current crisis rooted in subsidy backlash, Houthi takeover, military division, and the Saudi intervention.  The Hadi administration removed fuel subsidies in July 2014 that was part of the conditions of a $550 million loan from the International Monetary Fund; however, the Houthi movement organized significant mass protests to lower fuel prices and demand a new government (Laub & Robinson, 2020).  The Houthis moved to gain control of Yemen’s capital Sanaa and northwestern Yemen in mid-September 2014 as the Houthis gave up on a UN peace deal made earlier that month, which resulted in the collapse of the Hadi government and Hadi flee into exile in Saudi Arabia (Laub & Robinson, 2020).  These moves by the Houthis cascaded into the Yemeni military, effectively fracturing it as soldiers started backing different anti-Hadi factions and furthering the divisions within Yemeni society.   The collapse of peaceful mediation by the GCC shifted the mindset of regional powers like Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates from mediators into active players in the Yemeni conflict through engagement in a military campaign against the Houthis to restore the Hadi government (Laub & Robinson, 2020).  The various local factors leading to the Saudi-led intervention in Yemen began with the existing and widening fissures in Yemeni society that has been elusive to repair in the six-year-long war.

Factions in the Yemeni Conflict

            There are several factions on the ground in Yemen's conflict: the Republic of Yemen Government (ROYG), headed by President Hadi, Houthi forces, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), and the Southern Transitional Council (STC), led by General Aidarous al Zubaidi (Sharp, 2020, p. 4).  Additionally, several regional actors assist these local actors: Saudi Arabia supporting the ROYG, Iran supporting Houthi forces, and the United Arab Emirates supporting the STC (Sharp, 2020, p. 4).  There are a few non-regional nations involved in Yemen, as well as several international organizations.  The United States is engaged in Yemen, providing material support to the Saudi-led intervention and conducting anti-terrorism operations against AQAP.  Nations such as the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia, and China have provided weapons sales to various Gulf states or local proxies (Werkauser & Human Rights Watch, 2020).  International organizations such as the United Nations, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, World Health Organization, and International Red Cross provide various levels of assistance to the Yemeni people.  The non-localization of the Yemeni conflict with so many states being involved in varying degrees is a significant cause of non-resolution to Yemen's war.

Current Situation of the Yemeni Civil War

            In 2020, Yemen's situation remains a place of significant violence abounding with abject poverty, poor government, a collapsed economy, and famine.  The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) considers Yemen's situation the world’s worse humanitarian crisis (OCHA, 2020).  OCHA (2020) estimates 80% of the population or 24 million people require some form of assistance.  OCHA statistics paint a grim picture of Yemen's situation by stating 20 million Yemenis are food insecure, and 7.4 million are at risk of famine (OCHA, 2020).  Additionally, about 4.3 million people have fled their homes, with 3.3 million internally displaced (OCHA, 2020). Yemen’s public sector services are significantly constrained, with 51% of health centers remain operational, and 4.7 million children require some form of educational assistance as non-payment of salaries for teachers has impacted access to education (OCHA, 2020).  In the six years of fighting, the US-based Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED) estimates that about 100,000 Yemenis have died since 2015 (Sharp, 2020, pg. 4).  According to Human Rights Watch (2020), all parties in the conflict have been observed performing various human rights abuses, from unlawful airstrikes, children pressed into armed conflict, landmines, torture, and blocking and impeding humanitarian access.  Amnesty International reports that 4.5 million Yemenis have disabilities facing discrimination and humanitarian organizations have difficulty giving appropriate aid to those with disabilities (Debre, 2020). 

            One of the most significant current humanitarian issues in Yemen is access to humanitarian assistance and control of aid.  Human Rights Watch notes that all parties fighting on the ground in Yemen have done some access violations, whether from the Saudi-led coalition blockading Houthi controlled ports and airport to the Houthis restricting movements on aid in the city of Taizz (Human Rights Watch, 2020).  The port city of Hodeidah is one of the main ports for food and humanitarian assistance; the city has been a focal point of heavy fighting by the Houthis and the Saudi-led coalition since 2018 (Ghobari, 2019).  Issues with aid delivery continue as the United Nations has accused the Houthis that food aid has been stolen for other purposes, such as reselling supplies in black markets (Michael, 2018).  UN employees in Yemen have faced retaliation through the form of visa revoking and being forced out of the country if they report on the Houthis, conflicted between doing the right thing and maintaining aid access (Michael, 2018). 

UN Response to the Yemeni Conflict

            The UN has been involved in Yemen for many years before the current Yemeni Civil War, being a mediator in the political transition process after President Saleh resigned in 2011 (Laub & Robinson, 2020).  Despite UN efforts to manage Yemen's political divisions, the conflict escalated into large-scale military operations throughout the country; thus, the UN’s responsibility grew further into mediation and humanitarian assistance management.  Asseburg, Lacher, and Transfeld (2018, p. 44) note the UN has a near-impossible task of mediating Yemen's political divisions caused by a national level vacuum and ever-shifting local, regional, and international alliances make conflict resolution elusive.   The UN has performed piecemeal negotiations to stem the violence; however, large-scale peace remains out of reach because of the collapse of unified Yemen.   External influences from parties like Iran or the United States help bolster local actors' perceptions of power and ability to sustain their interests, explaining that the conflict’s longevity is by design (Asseburg, Lacher, & Transfeld, 2018, p. 56).

US Policy Response and Obligations in Yemen

            The longstanding US policy in Yemen is primarily grounded around anti-terrorism efforts against AQAP and maintain good relations with Saudi Arabia.  The Yemeni Civil War has immensely complicated US anti-terrorism efforts; however, those operations have been sustained throughout the conflict (Asseburg, Lacher, & Transfeld, 2018, p. 49-50).  The US has provided weapons to the Saudi-led coalition. Some of those weapons have been reportedly turned over directly to local Yemeni forces in possible violation of the US foreign military sales agreement (Sharp, 2020, p. 11).  The US has provided over $2.4 billion in humanitarian assistance to Yemen through USAID to support the World Food Programme (WFP) operations in Yemen, with an additional $30 million in direct bilateral aid to Yemen (Sharp, 2020, p. 13).  On May 6, 2020, the US announced $225 million in continued funding to the WFP aid operation just in time as the UN announced they would have to scale down operations due to lack of funding (Pamuk, 2020).  For the most part, US policy has stayed consistent between the Obama and Trump administration in the key objectives of anti-terrorism, support of the Saudi-led coalition, and humanitarian assistance.

Conclusion

            The Yemeni Civil War should be seen as a war of significant political differences between the local Yemeni actors. Each fight is to weaken each other’s position at any negotiation table.  The UN should maintain its forefront approach to negotiating, despite the UN Security Council's bias on which councilmembers support which sides of the conflict, realizing that the bigger peace at the regional level will remain elusive for some time to come.  A reunified Yemen before is off the table, and the UN should negotiate towards a possible power-sharing agreement.  Parties in the conflict need to have some way to facilitate compromise and devalue the mechanism of returning to fighting to gain more leverage.  Figuring out local interests and resolving the array of political issues in Yemen will eventually resolve the conflict, although it will not be a quick process.

            The US should seek greater accountability of its weapons sales if it chooses to continue selling weapons to the Gulf states.  The US should provide whatever clout it can provide to back up UN-brokered negotiations to end Yemen's fighting and humanitarian crisis.  Resolution of the Yemeni Civil War in a peaceful manner that considers all local actors on the ground could alleviate other pressing policies such as combating AQAP and reducing Iranian influence in Saudi Arabia’s vicinity.  Peace in Yemen would enhance regional security and bolster critical areas of concern in US national security in the region.  Eventually, these moves would eliminate the need to provide Yemen humanitarian aid and put future economic support to enhance Yemen's economic development.

References

Human Rights Watch. (2020, January 14). World Report 2020: Rights Trends in Yemen. Human Rights Watch. https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2020/country-chapters/yemen.

United Nations. (2020, March 12). About OCHA Yemen. United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. https://www.unocha.org/yemen/about-ocha-yemen.

Asseburg, M., Lacher, W., & Transfeld, M. (2018, October 1). Mission Impossible? German Institute for International and Security Affairs. https://www.swp-berlin.org/en/publication/mission-impossible-un-mediation-in-libya-syria-and-yemen/.

Debre, I. (2019, December 3). Amnesty: Yemen's disabled are neglected, and suffering. AP NEWS. https://apnews.com/article/d89f85756cb94af99352b1398667d1f2.

Ghobari, M. (2019, May 15). Fighting grips Yemen's Hodeidah port, complicating peace moves. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-yemen-security/fighting-grips-yemens-hodeidah-port-complicating-peace-moves-idUSKCN1SL09C.

Laub, Z., & Robinson, K. (2020, July 29). Backgrounder: Yemen in Crisis. Council on Foreign Relations. https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/yemen-crisis.

Michael, M. (2018, December 31). AP Investigation: Food aid stolen as Yemen starves. AP NEWS. https://apnews.com/article/bcf4e7595b554029bcd372cb129c49ab.

Pamuk, H. (2020, May 6). US announces $225 million in emergency aid to Yemen. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-yemen-aid/u-s-announces-225-million-in-emergency-aid-to-yemen-idUSKBN22I2M8.

Sharp, J. M. (2020, April 23). Yemen: Civil War and Regional Intervention. Washington DC; Congressional Research Service. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/R43960.pdf.

Werkhauser, N. (2020, February 4). Germany sells arms to members of Saudi-led Yemen coalition: DW: 02.04.2020. Deutsche Welle. https://www.dw.com/en/germany-sells-arms-to-members-of-saudi-led-yemen-coalition/a-53000044.  

Responsibility to Protect: Enhancing Action Measures

 

Executive Summary

            The responsibility to protect is one of the significant international human rights achievements in the 21^st century.  After the humanitarian crisis in Rwanda and the Balkans in the 1990s, the international community strove to establish basic guidelines for acting against human rights violations when states failed to protect the people they rule.  In 2005, the UN World Summit finally codified the basic tenants of responsibility to protect and use force in cases of last resort.  In the 2010s, the responsibility to protect has faced a midlife crisis as multiple humanitarian crises have brought about many questions of the doctrine's usefulness. 

            The issues of the responsibility to protect are around the inconsistent application of the doctrine, varying political will on the various crisis on a case-by-case basis, brazen national self-interest overriding the doctrine’s altruistic intent, and institutional gridlock at the UN Security Council level. The responsibility to protect challenges existing norms of non-intervention, state sovereignty, and self-interest policy motives. All these issues are interconnected, resulting in improving responsibility to protect an immensely challenging prospect.

            Policymakers should embark on the necessary reforms required to improve the effectiveness of the responsibility to protect, which still serves as the best tool to address mass atrocities when states fail in their obligation to provide the necessary human security.  This report suggests three recommendations to policymakers: 1) Adopt a “prevention-reaction-rebuilding” framework. 2)  External state and international organization operations need to partner up with target state institutions, civil society, and individuals to build a “whole approach” concept to construct sufficient capacity-building and resiliency against mass atrocities. 3) Undertake reform of the UN Security Council through permanent membership expansion and veto reform to prevent self-interest interference and clarify the action guidance towards acting against genocide, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity.

            Adopting these recommendations would improve cost-benefit analysis for policymakers away from the high costs of reaction towards lower costs of prevention through the “prevent-react-rebuild” framework. Additionally, it would provide for more effective, long-lasting solutions to at-risk states facing mass atrocities by relying and strengthening on locally built best practices.  Reforms to the UN Security Council would address the gridlock that has plagued states from acting to protect human lives from mass atrocities. The increasing spillover effects of these humanitarian crises threaten the international system's legitimacy and stability as these localized conflicts grow into enormous transnational security and stability issues.

           

Introduction

            In the 1990s, the international community advancements towards safeguarding human rights confronted a complicated question, what is the role and responsibilities of individual states, international organizations, and the international community towards states that fail to protect their populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity?  Wrangling over the debate between respecting national sovereignty, humanitarian intervention, and safeguarding human rights has become one of the most critical human rights issues in the 21^st century that has formulated the doctrine known as the responsibility to protect.  Human rights violations against people within national borders have challenged the absoluteness of state sovereignty from various events from the Balkans, Rwanda, Syria, and Myanmar.  While the responsibility to protect has become an international norm, there are still significant shortfalls with the doctrine due to the proliferation of the lack of impactful action in many human rights atrocities currently underway in Libya, Syria, and Myanmar.  This paper makes recommendations towards strengthening preventive measures, capacity building, and partnering with local actors to be significant action measures that external individual states, international organizations, and the international community can implement to solidify the intent of the responsibility to protect doctrine below the threshold of forceful humanitarian intervention.

Background

The end of the Cold War redirected international efforts towards addressing human security and how violations of people's safety by internal state actions under the abuse of national sovereignty principles was an unsettling normative behavior. Two pivotal atrocities and subsequent responses conducted in the 1990s in the Balkans and Rwanda led the international community to formulate how to address the question of the use of force in humanitarian intervention and other ways and means to address systematic violations of human rights within states (United Nations, n.d.).  In 2001, an independent, Canadian-led International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) established itself to provide additional guidance on the right of humanitarian intervention via coercive measures, mainly through military force (Bellamy & Luck, 2018).  The ICISS grappled with competing humanitarian and sovereignty norms to shift the discussion from a 'right to intervene' towards 'the responsibility to protect, expanding the concept from reaction to include prevention and rebuilding in the hopes of navigating through changing norms (Bellamy & Luck, 2018).  The ICISS efforts' culminated through the 2005 UN World Summit that resulted in codifying responsibility to protect within paragraphs 138 and 139 of the UN World Summit Outcome document (A/RES/60/1) (United Nations, n.d.).

The 2005 UN World Summit helped establish two foundational idea changes to global politics: state sovereignty comes with responsibilities and global responsibility to protect people threatened by significant human rights atrocities (Thakur & Maley, 2015, p. 3). The application of the responsibility to protect received further policy formulation from UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon (2009) that established three pillars of implementation:

1) protection responsibilities of the State

 2) international assistance and capacity-building

3) timely, decisive, and proportionate response when a state fails in its pillar one obligations

Between 2011 and 2015, the responsibility to protect doctrine has been mentioned in crises in Syria, Libya, Yemen, Islamic State in Iraq, Central African Republic, South Sudan, Sudan in Darfur and Abyei, Mali, Democratic Republic of Congo, Somalia, and Cote d'Ivoire which has been accompanied by a multifaceted international response (Bellamy & Luck, 2018).  In current humanitarian crises, the responsibility to protect is not referenced to Gaza, Nigeria against Boko Haram, Myanmar, and North Korea (Bellamy & Luck, 2018).  While the responsibility to protect has become more entrenched as an international norm, it is evident that various constraints continue to plague the responsibility to protect doctrine from what accounts for adequate fulfillment of the principle.

Existing Shortfalls of Responsibility to Protect Doctrine

            While the responsibility to protect doctrine has received a sufficient normative foothold in international law; however, the doctrine has extensive shortfalls with the inconsistent application, lack of political will, self-interest interference, and institutional gridlock.  Two of the most significant responsibility to protect cases in the 2010s has been the crisis in Libya and Syria with different actions that have influenced the principle's scope and effectiveness (Plunkett, 2020, p. 783).  Bellinger (2020, p. 372) notes that the context of Western-led humanitarian intervention has been historically fraught with self-interest primarily in mind at the very expense of the people they claim to be helping. The consequences of action in Libya have been compared to the results of inaction in Syria. Both have led to long-term stability issues and continued issues around protecting people from human rights atrocities due to not considering local interests (Bellinger, 2020, p. 390). Putra and Cangara (2019, p. 63) classify this weakness as a purposeful misinterpretation of the responsibility to protect doctrine by external states to fulfill national interests only has put immense pressure on the doctrine's effectiveness.

            Another weakness to the responsibility to protect principle is the lack of accurate assessment by advocates to assess the correct cost and benefits framework beyond chronological response regarding the 2009 UN Secretary-General’s three pillars of implication (Ballamy & Luck, 2018). A significant hurdle to overcome by state decision-makers is the “prevention dilemma” since consequences of action and inaction are impossible to fully know the impact of a certain course of action that states are strongly risk-averse (Ballamy & Luck, 2018).  The world has not approached atrocities in the simultaneous metric of prevention, reaction, and rebuilding while mainly looking towards the high costs of response once atrocities are underway.  In hindsight, prevention measures are typically significantly lower in cost than atrocity response and rebuilding; however, external actors have a difficult time and interest in investing appropriately in effective case-by-case preventive measures.

            Existing institutional gridlock at the UN Security Council (UNSC) level has left the most overt application of the responsibility to protect via military force continuous at the table since the 2011 Libya intervention (Babbitt, 2017, pp. 432-433).  UNSC vetoes from Russia and China have continuously prevented military force in significant numbers in Syria, Yemen, and other places (Babbitt, 2017, p. 433). The overt attention surrounding military force potential and actual use have unhelpfully narrowed the responsibility to protect doctrine scope from its ICISS intentions towards full-spectrum prevention-reaction-rebuilding. Additionally, the institutional gridlock is directly influenced by each state’s cost-benefit analysis towards inaction and advancing their national self-interest within the UNSC.  Political opposition to approving military force in responsibility to protect has national self-interest as UNSC members have no reason to believe in altruistic reasoning to any military response part of the responsibility to protect.  The implementation of the responsibility to protect is incredibly political and delicate to all actors throughout the framework.  Despite the existing weaknesses and overt political nature surrounding responsibility to protect, the framework is still the best case for the international community to confront internally driven atrocities.

Recommendations to Strengthen Responsibility to Protect

            This report makes several recommendations to help invigorate the responsibility to protect doctrine:

•          Revisiting ICISS “prevention-reaction-rebuilding” framework for policymakers to consider a plethora of non-military means
•          External actors and international organizations rely more on capacity building approaches with the target state institutions and civil society to enhance prevention measures
•        Reform of the UN Security Council

Many of the challenges facing implementing the responsibility to protect will not disappear; however, that does not mean that doctrine is dead.  The responsibility to protect principle needs another shift that returns it towards the 2001 ICISS report that drives towards conflict prevention.  Plunkett (2020, p. 802) notes that the current interpretation of responsibility to protect is a culture of reaction instead of a culture of prevention.  Such a shift would move the responsibility to protect doctrine more firmly into the diplomatic and non-military means.  One such means of diplomacy would be mediation efforts as advocated by Babbitt (2020, p. 433) in Kenya in 2007 and Cote d’Ivoire in 2010 to prevent further escalation and atrocities.  The ICISS report focused on four prevention areas: 1) Early warning, 2. Diplomacy, 3. Ending impunity, and 4. Preventive deployments (Thakur & Maley, 2015, p. 158-159).  Returning the responsibility to protect doctrine back towards the ICISS report's intention would significantly reduce the hanging problems by employing the “last resort” measures of military force.

  McLoughlin (2016, p. 473) points out a 2013 UN report on responsibility to protect that examines risk factors and resiliency sources towards why some do not experience mass atrocities.  It is primarily acknowledged that when mass atrocities happen in states, it is the forces of the state and society within that state that construct or breakdown resiliency against atrocity. “Root causes” of mass atrocities are not significantly influenced by external actors, so external states and international organizations need to be cognizant that domestic actors have the most significant level of success and ownership to prevent crimes against humanity (McLoughlin, 2016, pp. 483-484).  Local actors' understanding of existing risk management efforts can help with the cost-benefit analysis of external actors to strengthen existing positive processes that do not require enormous resources and haphazard strategies.  Brigg (2018, pp. 846-847) that external humanitarian efforts cannot solve complex humanitarian issues in Geneva or New York but being on-the-ground to achieve effective prevention and protection efforts in target areas. Local and individual actors are still suspect to the same motivational issues that plague states in maintaining unfair political orders that reinforce atrocities. External actors need to be aware on a case-by-case basis of whether or not they should work with certain actors and their motives. Top-down external approaches to conflict resolution against mass atrocities have always been problematic, and eliminating the hierarchical approach to increase local input can drive greater local ownership to resolve human rights issues (Brigg, 2018, p. 847).  Partnering with local actors can drive effective external actor operations towards favorable outcomes in conflict resolution, which hinges on external partners' excellent understanding of local actors.

Lastly, the UN Security Council's reform is necessary to enhance the responsibility of protect doctrine to couple it to the national interest to make the international system more credible to the eyes of everyone.  While former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan in 2003 proposed several UNSC structure reforms that stalled because of the amount of state brazenly promoting self-interest in the current permanent five structure and concerns of neo-imperialism from weak enforcement of responsibility to protect if abused (Banteka, 2015, p. 21).  One of the more comfortable measures to reforming the structure of the UNSC via procedural method is to advocate towards responsibility not to veto (Banteka, 2015, p. 7).  The idea behind the responsibility not to veto from the permanent members of the UNSC was brought up in the 2005 UN World Summit. Still, it did not get into the final document due to significant pressure from the permanent members (Banteka, 2015, p. 7).  Not using the permanent member veto in cases of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity is becoming an increasingly clear need due to the knock off effects from the poor management of resolving the humanitarian crisis so far in the 21^st century.  These mass atrocities occurring within national borders in places like Syria, Libya, Sudan, Myanmar, and others have created significant spillover effects that make them transnational security issues.  The permanent members of the UNSC cannot keep sweeping the self-interest veto power indefinitely as it creating a global security issue that is way beyond the scope of responsibility to protect.  Necessary UNSC reforms would enhance both international security efforts and bolster responsibility to protect.

Conclusion

            The development of the responsibility of protect doctrine is among the most critical developments in international human rights in the 21^st century.  Despite the challenges the doctrine has faced against embedded norms of non-intervention, absolute state sovereignty, and self-interest, the responsibility to protect has established an entrenched beachhead that focuses on the common humanity and their rights regardless of borders.  Improving responsibility to protect requires acknowledging the large amount of work to make it a more attractive tool for policymakers.  Making responsibility to protect as a proper, useful tool for policymakers requires three suggestions: 1) Returning to the ICISS “prevention-reaction-rebuilding” framework away from military force options. 2. External actors need to partner effectively with target state institutions and civil society for a “whole approach” to resolving potential conflict and atrocities. 3). The structure of the UN Security Council needs to be reformed from preventing vetoing based on self-interest and enabling atrocities.  These suggestions would enhance the standing of states who advocate for these reforms and bolster the legitimacy of the international state-based system that is in dire need of new structures of accountability.   

References

United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect. https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/about-responsibility-to-protect.shtml.

Thakur, R., & Maley, W. (Eds.). (2015). Theorising the Responsibility to Protect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139644518

Babbitt, E. F. (2017). Responsibility to Protect: Time to Reassess. Journal of Human Rights Practice, 9(3), 431–435. https://doi-org.ezproxy.umgc.edu/10.1093/jhuman/hux024

Ballamy, A. J., & Luck, E. C. (2018). The Responsibility to Protect: From Promise to Practice. John Wiley & Sons.

Andika, B. & Cangara, A.R. (2019). Invoking the Responsibility to Protect: The Derogation of Its Principles and Implementation. Journal of Liberty and International Affairs, 4(3), 56–65.

Banteka, N., Dangerous Liaisons: The Responsibility to Protect and a Reform of the U.N. Security Council (May 1, 2015). Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, Vol. 54, No. 2, 2015, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2601246

Bellinger, M. (2020). The Dangers of Humanitarian Intervention and the Responsibility to Protect Doctrine, and a Partial Solution. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 27(2), 371–390. https://doi-org.ezproxy.umgc.edu/10.2979/indjglolegstu.27.2.0371

Brigg, M. (2018). Humanitarian symbolic exchange: extending Responsibility to Protect through individual and local engagement. Third World Quarterly, 39(5), 838–853. https://doi-org.ezproxy.umgc.edu/10.1080/01436597.2017.1396534

Plunkett, S. F. (2020). Refocusing to Revive: The Responsibility to Protect in International Atrocity Prevention. Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law, 48(3), 773–802.

McLoughlin, S. (2016). From Reaction to Resilience in Mass Atrocity Prevention: An Analysis of the 2013 UN Report "The Responsibility to Protect: State Responsibility and Prevention." Global Governance, 22(4), 473

Ki-moon, B. (2009, January 12). Implementing the Responsibility to Protect: Report of the Secretary-General. New York; United Nations. https://www.un.org/ruleoflaw/files/SG_reportA_63_677_en.pdf

People Migrate Because Opportunity Is On The Other Side

People like to bring up tout certain policies or ideas in light of a tragedy, most of them in the name of security or safety as a knee-jerk reaction... forgetting that some of those ideas are really a bad idea under further scrutiny.  Things that dehumanize whatever ideals of freedom, democracy, or liberty the people of Western nations always like to tout.  However, in the first sight of trouble, we are quick to protect ourselves and walk back into the hypocrisy. These actions in the name of security and safety is the fuel that keeps burning their fires.

Syrian Refugees Displaced in the Middle East

When you look at any conflict zone in the world over the course of history, there is always people becoming displaced by violence and becoming refugees.  The Syrian Civil War has been ongoing for nearly 5 years, displacing over 4 million people... people actively avoiding conflict towards a conflict with no end in sight.  Nearly 2 million Syrians live in Turkey in barely livable, underfunded refugee camps.

Being stationed in Turkey during the beginning of the Syrian Civil War, I saw the beginning of the problems that would come around to affect the region and elsewhere in the past year is in the lack of apathy towards normal human beings displaced by conflict that started beyond their control.  As the years of the conflict continues, can you really blame people by getting hopeless of the detoriated situation in their home country and not seek out stable, greener pastures in North America or Europe.

People advocating closing borders, naturalization quotas, etc. really have no idea what the consequences of those actions will be.  Imagine yourself as one of those four million Syrians that had to flee a full-fledged war that ended any resemblance of a normal life for the foreseeable future.

 Now, the first option is to flee towards Syrian government-controlled territory through a violent frontline gunfight and become another number to the casualty count or be mistaken for the enemy.  On the other hand, you become part of one of the many rebel groups, depending on your ideological leanings from moderate Free Syrian Army to complete radical Islamic State and arm yourself with a Kalashnikov with them.  Or... if you not wanting to be part of the shitfest and try to have an early death, you could flee to somewhere deemed safe like a refugee camp or relatives in a "safe" city before being forced into either faction.  If you chose the last option, congrats, you just joined four million like-minded people.

As the conflict lengthened, as in any historic conflict, people affect start to move to "more stable" bordering countries to escape the violence.  However, as you find soon enough that becoming a refugee isn't a great option either.  Most nations bordering modern conflicts are barely stable as well and you're among thousands of your fellow people in an overcrowded and underfunded refugee camp.

This is where the first stage of normal human resentment is going to occur.  Host country people have little sympathy to the turmoil next door, I could tell you that being in Turkey, you could a Syrian from a Turk based on treatment alone.  Being a refugee, you have almost no rights to really doing anything useful than to simply continue existing.  The whole mindset of "they're out to get our jobs" isn't just limited to America, it's really everywhere else too.

Being a refugee, is just a normal human wanting access to the opportunity to start anew while waiting out the turmoil to finish in their home country.  Instead, refugees are embroidered into a limbo of bureaucracy of asylum-seeking and very restrictive economic mobility.  So imagining all days and years that passed that you fled Syria to some UNHCR refugee camp in Turkey just be caught in a limbo of real nothingness.

As most people, naturally, you're going to be fed up dealing the legal system... or lack of a clear legal system, coupled with no economic opportunity to pack up from Turkey and move on to the next great place to go to that isn't a complete shithole... aka Europe.

As we know for sometime, not all European countries, either in the European Union or not, are equal in terms of economic strength.  Think for a minute as a Syrian refugee... there's no jobs in Turkey or Lebanon... the Saudis and rest of the Gulf States aren't an attractive resting spot due to how the Gulf States treat non-Arabs.  The news of how Greece is nearly bankrupt and has high unemployment doesn't sound like a place to stake down.  Non-Schengen zone EU states like Bulgaria, Romania, and Croatia also suffer from high unemployment, thus lack of opportunity.  Southern EU states like Italy and Spain are in a terrible economic state, so not appealing.

As a refugee, the opportunity lies in Germany, France, United Kingdom, the Nordic States, Canada, or the United States.  This is the paradigm of the displaced refugee, of not just the Middle East, but of really any conflict region in the world.  People don't just happen to move at some whim, they move because they have to move, whether it be for economic mobility or violent conflict. They move to not just live, but have a chance to rebuild.

When you hear the body count of Paris, it is indeed tragic, 128 people killed at various leisure venues.  However, there are thousands of others from Africa, the Middle East, and Afghanistan escaping turmoil, a general hopelessness and countries that have no chance in hell of economy livability for the foreseeable future die in their journey to seek better pasture, you have to ask yourself... Would I leave too if I had the motivation and opportunity?

The obvious elephant in the room is radicals bent on evil.  Yeah, there's plenty of people that are evil, not everyone can be vetted.  It is surprising though how a small percentage of people decide the policies of the majority to migrate against such threats.  I am not staying we stop trying; however, it is time to not compromise our values in the name of security and safety.  Any ideology can be warped to whatever an individual decides to justify the means to the end.

I know full well I've been those discussions of making fun of the Middle East and advocating turning the region into a concrete parking lot and a giant Wal-Mart.  Is that really fair to say that to 95% of the population that really just trying to live whatever normal life they wish to have?

I think that many Westerns, most that have no idea of what it is live without a country and having whatever normal life one had ripped away into a seemingly endless conflict, are blatantly ignorant of the situation in the Middle East.  At the end of the day, most people in the world want a sense of a predictable and stable life.  We know that the Middle East is a bit quirky culturally than what most in the West are use to dealing with, but the region has inched forward since the end of the Cold War.

It is not hard to see the reasons of resentment by any Syrian refugee or any refugee anywhere else has towards the Western world, be it from blatant economic exploitation, supporting non-democratic governments, and general apathy to affected countries legitimate internal issues.  The hand of Western world has guided in lengthening instability in already existing unstable regions of the world, whether it be through general apathy as seen with the 1994 Rwandan genocide, to the questionable actions of the West in the current conflict in Syria.

Everyone has resentments on something or someone, both internally and externally.  For refugees, one has to be really ignorant to say that, "What do they have to be so angry about that they'll resort to some violence?"  Seriously, when you have live uprooted from you from both internal and external actors coupled with inefficient bureaucracy towards refugees, limited economic mobility, limited human rights... something has to give.

If the Western world is the "gold standard" of how to conduct our lives, based on supposedly Judeo-Christian ideals... it's pretty damn hypocritical and judgmental on whom is acceptable and who gets the shit end of the stick.  The first step to fixing a problem is not to give people looking for a solution more hurdles, but assist those broken to the point of almost no return.

Thanksgiving in a Broken World

The last time I typed on this blog was this time last year about Thanksgiving in a Non-Stop World, I found myself hard to type above the masterpiece I wrote earlier, since the words written have held up very well to the day. I highly encourage you all to read it again since it holds timeless advice.

Being abroad and once again back in America for a brief time, it gives a unique perspective of looking at America from the outside like a foreigner, except you know the "why?" behind all the troubles/ills of the country.  Foreigners ask why all these things happen in America, they cannot answer the questions that linger in their mind.  If you ever been in a leadership position, looking from the outside into your own organization is quite an opportunity to assess that reveals things hidden while being too busy.

Anyhow, this world is quite broken.  People dig at various problems thinking they've solved them without getting at the root of various problems plaguing the globe.  It may seem like a cop out, but human nature is the root of many problems in this finite world we live in.  Yes, humanity has 'progressed' on many fronts, but you have to wonder what really new has happened under the sun with humanity in the thousands of years of our existence on this blue dot in the universe.

There's still greed, selfishness, racism, war, murder, lying, adultery, envy, short-sighted, etc plaguing the world.  We've become better at being bad, more efficient with developing new tools to manipulate each other.  We're quite ignorant at looking at the cause and focus on the symptoms.  The world is full of prejudice, it's not just in Ferguson, it's alive and well across the world.  I've seen it with my own eyes across the continents, with my encounters with Turks, Germans, Austrians, Swiss, Japanese, etc.

It's something you couldn't fix with the Civil Rights Act of 1965, or the shedding of millions over 150 years ago in the Civil War.  It's a war that Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi saw that no legislation could fix, but a war that had to be fought to change every hard heart of the peoples they lived amongst.

The world is sick because we're selfish and greedy, and we're out to marginalize anyone else that wishes to challenge the status quo.  If humanity was truly progressive, we would have solved many of the ills in the world, but we continue to fan the fires in certain regions.  You don't have to be an economics or geographic major to connect the dots of why things are way they are.  Humanity is weak divided, selfish when existence threaten, and seldom concerned with event thousands of miles away.

The health of the nation is reflected through it's citizens, not it's leadership.  The buck stops with each American and most Americans are failing with their duty of due diligence.  With little ethics, morals, common sense, and the borderline Nationalism... the luck of America is that everyone else is fairing no better.

That's right, America is pretty damn lucky compared to a lot of places.  When in Turkey, people complained that everyone was out against them.  In Europe, people were unhappy with their situation in life.  Even in Japan, the efficiency of the system only masks the problems underlying the country.  China is beginning to feel the full suffering from the One Child Policy.

Everyone is complaining, life is full of unfair circumstances.  That's the lesson of the world so far, everyone is suffering, things are different everywhere.  Not everything is going according to plan. Copying someone else's success doesn't equate to success yourself.  What is there to be thankful for when living seems to be a burden?

We can only approach the world one day at a time, grateful to be alive to make a small difference in this world.  Being good stewards with what we have been entrusted with, nothing more, nothing less.  We grow in responsibility because we strive to put in the great effort to be rewarded.  The "Thank You!" or "Have a wonderful day!" from a complete stranger.  It is the small things that keep us going when we slowly turn numb to the ills of the world.

Of course there is a lot of trivial things to enjoy a comfortable life... money, family, friends, a roof over one's head, food in no particular order.  In a lot of place, quite a bit of that is missing.  Thanksgiving is not only a period of self-reflection of what one is thankful for, but also to reflect and share in the spreading of Thanksgiving to others, giving that hope that humanity as a whole is better than what it is made out to be.

There are places in the world that are less fortunate than America.  Some say we're barely making by, but that just means the best of us is barely making it.  Is that why people flock from broken regions of the world to safer and more economic prosperous regions to seek fulfillment.  People are fleeing broken systems to less broken ones.

Instead, America's commercialization of the holidays has made more even more ignorant of the world's ills by continuing to focus on the latest deals on things. We complain of slow internet, how bad the gridlock is, or some politician is evil and out to destroy America. Then there are the others out there dying to Ebola because medical infrastructure is destroyed, or how people fleeing a virtual war on drug cartels that is being fueled by another nation's demand for drugs, or weapons being funneled into unstable regions dominated by mob rule with no sight of peace.

That's the hypocrisy of humanity, that everyone is guilty of. I admit that when I think about my lot in life, I'm eternally grateful, but I feel shame that people cling to borders and fear as to withdraw help with so many others are suffering everyday.  We're pretty selective of using the Golden Rule on a humanity level.  What if that was us?  What will we be everyday to the fellow man on the road Jericho?  The travelers that didn't help the man or the Good Samaritan?  Sometimes we cannot save ourselves, we need external assistance.  On the individual level, that is through family and friends.  With a society, that's organizations.

When you realize the magnitude of hopelessness of all the world's suffering, you ask why you can't help more?  You'll realize we want to self-preserve what we have, since the sacrifice to assist is very great since everybody is suffering something.

I am definitely thankful for my current situation in life.  My travels, which I am grateful to have the opportunity to conduct, has revealed much about the state of the world. America isn't perfect, but what separates it from everyone else in the world is that when the lights die out for hope is some other region of the world, we swing into action.  However, these days, even that is getting reserved on doing.

All the ungratefulness and the thoughts of the impossibly are testing the faith of the times.  Nothing is impossible, and while people being corrected might not be thankful today, they might later.  We are ambassadors of Christ, we serve unconditionally, the first to spring in action and the last to pack our bags.  We will be thoroughly tested, brought to the breaking edge, not just as individuals, but as the whole of humanity, not as a nation.

The leaders of the past in America said America was more as an idea rather a nation.  Today, we're more as any other nation rather pursuing this lofty idea born hundreds of year ago.  We do hoard it selfishly from others than in the past. We've corrupted it with preconditions.  Some wait for another Civil War, others politically gridlock the nation, and the rest forgetting that real change always began at home rather in DC. Yes, I am critical towards America, but I am not without hope.  I know people that have little to no hope in the nation, those are the people that are undermining the idea.

We are duty-bound to serve everyday, we are always under leadership of someone.  Helping the least of us isn't for nation or for self, but for God.  Man-made institutions are always falling short, and a giving heart is seemingly in short supply globally.

I am thankful to be alive, to see this world as it really is.  Thankful enough that I have resources to help where I can, when I can.  Doing big things is always snowballed by small things to make the difference in the world.  Have faith and keep up the good work, I am not perfect and nor is the fellow man I am helping, whoever they are. Although as a whole, we lie, steal, cheat, and envy; showcasing the worse of us, at least we tried to show the best of who we can be in the short life we live.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone!

Thanksgiving in a Non-Stop World

"At times our own light goes out and is rekindled by a spark from another person. Each of us has cause to think with deep gratitude of those who have lighted the flame within us."
~ Albert Schweitzer

 "Gratitude changes the pangs of memory into a tranquil joy."

~ Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Time is such a precious commodity, the very silent currency in which we exchange for every endeavour we undertake.   Once a year, the people of the United States celebrate the holiday Thanksgiving, but it is a lost meaning for many people.  Not many people are gifted with the patience to stand still in our non-stop world and reflect on their time over the year, and even rarer, people that reflect on their daily work.

Thanksgiving is not just another holiday, nor just another day off work.  It is a day of true reflection of your time so far over the past year.  There many frustrations in this world, but our strength is in identifying the good things that happened for us.  And the question we should pose to ourselves is what are truly thankful for... not just the good things that happened to us, but to celebrate the success of our families, friends, co-workers, employer and whatever else we take stock in.

Happiness begets happiness, it is a truly infectious emotion.  I was never always an optimist, far from it at several points throughout life.  Life is not meant to be lived like Eeyore from Winnie the Pooh, as depression is as infectious as happiness to spread to other people.  I never admit that my high-charging optimism comes with a high price of energy expended to keep people pressing forward with a hope of a better future.  The reality of the situation in life is that life does throw curve balls, but it is not without giving out blessings. 

But we may be temporarily knocked down; but we must come back in swinging, and swinging hard.  Getting up though is never without difficulty, although the key I've found in life so far is entrusting your full confidence in close friends you have extensively invested your time in, to have each other's back through the hours when all lights seem to be out.

Sometimes it is good to detach from the world, to reflect upon oneself, to think about what happened over the past year.  Think about you and other you care about through these lens:

• the good times, 
• the bad times, 
• the storms of life weathered, 
• the people gotten to know, 
• the people gotten to know better,
• the pains endured,
• the triumphs achieved,
• the suffering experienced,
• the accomplishments attained

Whether the good or bad in life, full reflection is required for the deepest gratitude in our self-assessment through another year in life.  Life is fleeting, like dust in the wind... it is finite, but our past actions define how we act in the future.  We have just one shot at life, we must expend our energy to build up people

This is the week of Thanksgiving... not everyone is in positive territory.  Our tongues are a two-edged sword, slow to build up and quick to destroy others.  The sun should never set without setting things straight between two or more quarreling parties.  Actions are much louder than words, we must always strive to be the better man or woman to uphold character and reputation.  We must be the light to others when all other lights have gone out.

You never really know a person until you hear about their life story.  Their life story is everything laid bared to see.  It is the best way to understand how they act, how they feel, what drives them, what detaches them from motivation, etc.  It is the ultimate treasure chest of knowledge about another person that it.  With this knowledge, you empower yourself to make them better in such a powerful way that you'll never ever seen before.  It is in this way you gain their true confidence, in turn drives a trust that is hard to break.

We must find something to rejoice in this world, a world in which many negative things happen.  Reading the news shows the universal pain and suffering that this world experiences everyday.  You may not like your job, but you're alive still... you still have friends backing you up... you have a family that you maybe able to lean on... etc.  Find those kernels of good everyday, not just for the year.

Time is a blessing and a curse.  Not everything good turns up immediately, unfortunately, it takes quite awhile for the blessing to come.  Good things fall into place, given time.  That is the hope I and others should cling to.  The worries of today are just sufficient to deal with, that tomorrow's and future worries, I just let go since I cannot control them.

I implore you to find whatever you're thankful for, not just for Thanksgiving Day, but in everyday.  Finding that positivity strives to make each day to be just a little bit more bearable than it was.  Positivity feeds more positivity and will energize others!

I know I show a strong face of positivity, but everyday I am fighting the same battle everyone else is, but I'm out there fighting back against the negativity of life.  Yes, I am alone in a foreign country with  people that I know expressly, nor given my full confidence in but I make do with what I have.  I have fought with sleepless nights and an isolation that has disturbed me at times, but I am still here.  You ask why.  It is because I see a magnitude of opportunities that far outweighs whatever negativity I feel. 

Being in Turkey has expressly fulfilled a long-standing desire to see the world and damnit, I'm going to see it.  Yes, I miss being home, my stateside friends, mentors, and family, but I've been given a once in a lifetime opportunity that I shall not waste.   I miss the convenience of being in the United States, but a life would not be well-spent staying home. I believe in my success and drive for success.  I want to empower power with that same belief as well.  I have reached and surpassed my near-time goals, life has been the best in the 23 years of my life, and it's only getting brighter.

Was getting to this point without hardship?  It is with a resounding no.  There is still a past I must deal with, and I know I'm playing against time to catch up where I stumbled behind on.  I know I must drive ever onward to the vision laid out before me.  People believed in my potential when I did give up in myself several times in the past, others relit the vision I believe was dead, and now push forward towards that vision for me.
      
My hope is to continue to give others hope and drive to move forward to meeting what they want out of life.  I know full well I've been given quite the unique set of skills that are still be developing and still seeking the people that help me mature those skills to unleash their full potential.  It is in this latest stage of life, being in the USAF that it seems where it will happen, preparing for the unknown post-USAF life stage yet to come.

Happy Thanksgiving everyone!  And remember, take the time during the day to reflect on your life and what you're thankful for.

At times our own light goes out and is rekindled by a spark from another person. Each of us has cause to think with deep gratitude of those who have lighted the flame within us.
Albert Schweitzer
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/keywords/gratitude.html#z2AMq1uC8A4MR2DZ.99

At times our own light goes out and is rekindled by a spark from another person. Each of us has cause to think with deep gratitude of those who have lighted the flame within us.
Albert Schweitzer
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/keywords/gratitude.html#z2AMq1uC8A4MR2DZ.99

At times our own light goes out and is rekindled by a spark from another person. Each of us has cause to think with deep gratitude of those who have lighted the flame within us.
Albert Schweitzer
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/keywords/gratitude.html#z2AMq1uC8A4MR2DZ.99

At times our own light goes out and is rekindled by a spark from another person. Each of us has cause to think with deep gratitude of those who have lighted the flame within us.
Albert Schweitzer
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/keywords/gratitude.html#z2AMq1uC8A4MR2DZ.99

The Misunderstanding in Congress

There is much to be said about the political divisiveness in Washington D.C.; however, I am sadden to see that the traditional use politics at the appropriate level with the appropriate weaponry to counter opposing opinion has gotten out of hand.  Both elected representatives Republicans and Democrats and their constituents are misguided in their attempt to impose their view of the world upon everyone else, that the causalities in the massive verbal violence is the idea of compromise.  Unfortunately, the zealous defenders of the Party line on either side are killing America while an apathetic public watches hopelessly, questioning why we've gotten here.

Actually there is a good reason why we all arrived here like this, and it does mainly in the American public's misunderstanding of the American political structure and how to properly address issues in the proper chain of escalation.  Many Americans try to keep propelling many issues into the Federal spotlight when clearly it is not ready for such a debate at such a scale.

Not to say that healthcare reform shouldn't be a national issue, it's that people are looking for solutions at all the wrong places.  Humanity is benevolently ignorant of several concepts of itself sometimes to think everyone on the same page of certain things that are "right" or "wrong".  History has proven over and over that this is simply false and to think otherwise is outright silly.   Simple conversation with over a dozen people can easily show you rather quickly that we maybe close on agreeing that things are an issue, but that's where it all ends.

Yes, of course of the bulk of the money and political backbone to enforce law lies in Federal endorsement and enforcement; however, we're a nation that is separate, yet equal.  Universal anything is a more of a scientific discovery of arriving to eventual consensus, rather than dragged into a verbal fistfight of your position being morally right and/or theirs being wrong.

I've spoken quite vocally in sometime that the American public under-utilize the powers vested in the individual States to experiment for viable solutions for very polarized issues that clearly cannot be universally accepted by the entire population of the United States.  Not to say that this is a perfect system, but one cannot deny that each region has different needs and perspective to their issues.

It would be best that Congress not get dragged into such divisive issues directly, instead by limiting it's exposure in whatever way we can until we can discover that consensus that will drive us together to form a national policy.  But that's the problem with AHCA is that we know it's imperfect, yet we continue with it anyway.  We're so quick skip the innovative process to discover what works or not, that really, we need to discover it through small groups of people, i.e. The States.

Our political mentality goes against everything we believe in maintaining people's ability to choose and not infringe on others.   I know it's a two-way street that issues cannot be outright dismissed like the House Republicans are currently are doing right now, but let's not forget that the AHCA is a flawed system built onto another flawed system, something Democrats would like to forget about.

Elections and majorities do not mandate anything for any agenda regardless of political party or affiliation.  If people really want the infighting to stop, they need to start pave the way solve the big issues at the local level first.  You're maybe right in your cause; however, imposing big changes when clearly no one is happy about it is quite illogical.  You have to take a step back and think to yourself, "Why do I do this when obviously it's not perfect and other solutions do exist?  What makes my solution better than others? etc"  Small steps lead to big victories.  Striving for big victories can be self-inflecting and backfire if you fail to convince a resounding majority. 

I would love to see both sides working together to fund various testbed ideas on hot button topics, but alas, all I see is people too focused to impose their ultimate solution to such big problems to the audience of 300+ million people.  When you think of every hot button subject facing America, only a few could truly be ready to face the prime time test of national resolution.

Many of the social issues facing America can begun to be solved on lower levels of governance.  It made prove a patchwork of ideas and counter-intuitive to what certain people want, but that's the beauty of America, we discover what works for us, instead of formulating something that maybe on the right track.

There is power in the local and state politics, but people are too blind to realize it.  American history is filled with the idea of experimenting with discovering law to what best suited the local populace.  While it made have sparked a Civil War and other negative events like Jim Crow laws, those were the only notable negative effects to untold positive outcomes.  We have in the past, passed gun-control laws in the West through many town to control gun use.  States and local laws have in the past paved the way to national inclusion.  I have to admit, time is sometimes the only best remedy to soften hard hearts on certain issues and let subtle changes in public opinion slowly slide to the right way.

America is a trial-and-error experiment that finds it's eventual consensus to an eventual solution at the national level at some point.  Nowadays, we don't even try to figure out what could work, we just formulate something that might work right at the national level when various experiments, if allowed to have formed at the local/state level, could pave the way to a national level law.

But until people realize that bringing all sorts of issues to Congress is actually counter-productive to the day-to-day business of Congress, we'll continue on this polarized road that leads to nothing good in the end.  It leads to moments like these where each side will be tempted greatly to cripple one another agendas by crippling the very structure we've hopelessly placed the majority of our avenues to solve issues.  But this should not, nor never be the case.  We have the structure in place to escape a paralyzed federal government from time-to-time, we just have to utilize it, and utilize it correctly.

Overview of Invovlement in Syria

The Obvious First Strike: Tomahawk Cruise Missiles

With Secretary of State John Kerry putting up strong emotional statement of the latest accusation of the Syrian government using chemical weapons on their people, the United States and her allies are ramping up the military options for an eventual strike of some sort, which is a done deal in my opinion.

Everything in the region in the past few months has slowly put the pieces into place for a limited involvement against the Syrian government, but the question has been where and what equipment would be involved.  Looking at what has been placed into the region in the past year and more importantly over the summer gives a glaring look at what places would be doing the most work.

Assets in the region:
United States 

•  Four US destroyers - USS Gravely, USS Ramage, USS Barry and USS Mahan - are in the eastern Mediterranean, equipped with approximately 360 cruise missiles.
• Airbases at Incirlik and Izmir in Turkey, and in Jordan.  Official US fighter squadrons are only in Jordan at the moment.
• Two aircraft carriers - USS Nimitz and USS Harry S Truman are in the wider region. 

Britain

• The Royal Navy's response force task group- which includes helicopter carrier HMS Illustrious and frigates HMS Montrose and HMS Westminster - is in the region on a previously-scheduled deployment.
• RAF Akrotiri airbase in Cyprus. 
• A British Trafalgar class submarine equipped with cruise missiles.

France

• French aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle is currently in Toulon in the western Mediterranean.
• French Raffale and Mirage aircraft can also operate from Al-Dhahra airbase in the UAE.

US-British-French Assets in the Region

While this week has pretty much spelt out the writing on the wall for a strike, the news of having the US Navy destroyer floatilla increase their number by one due to extended deployment signals an imminent military action by the Western powers.  The use of Tomahawk cruise missiles on Arleigh Burke destroyers is the usual classic option used in the past as the desired choice for limited involvement, such as pre-Gulf War 2 on Iraq by the Clinton Administration.

People have said that we may do a no-fly zone; however, this option realistically is not plausible at the moment due to the lack of assets close by to begin sustained SEAD (supression of enemy air defenses) operations as readily.  If this was possible, the USS Harry S Truman Carrier Strike Group would likely be in the Mediterranean Sea at the moment instead of lurking in the Gulf of Aden. However, dropping down to one carrier in the Persian Gulf is against US naval strategy just in case any conflict in the Middle East expands to involve more players.  It would behoove to think then that a possible SEAD role would fall to NATO partners instead of a predominant US role in establishing a no-fly zone similar to what happened in Libya back in 2011.

It is interesting to see the various third-parties and regional nations, such as Turkey, place their response as the US heats up the call for action.  The last 24 hours has seen the United Kingdom to be the official pusher for a UN resolution to start limited military action in Syria.  At least how the resolution to the Security Council is worded to blunt the Russian and Chinese vetoes.  This is the beginning of the 'coalition of the willing' from the West, which will begin heavy NATO involvement no less.

Meanwhile, "I think international law is clear on this. International law says that military action must be taken after a decision by the Security Council," Lakhdar Brahimi, UN-Arab League special envoy for Syria, told reporters in Geneva.  This may paint the Arab League into a corner from not intervening.

While in Turkey, which has been one of the most vocal critics on the Syrian conflict, maybe forced not to intervene.  Last year, Turkey’s Parliament passed a government motion for a one-year mandate authorizing the military to use ground troops for cross-border military operations into Syria that began in October 2012. However, opposition parties are lining up against the AKP to kill renewing that measure.  “Their taking the Parliament’s will for granted is disrespect of the AKP [the Justice and Development Party] to the high Parliament and the AKP deputies,” Loğoğlu said in a written statement, warning that the AKP should not forget “the March 1, 2003, motion” experience.

Now, this is important because Turkey back in 2003 denied an expanded US ground presence for the Iraq War which strained US-Turkey relations for many years afterwards.  There is no support from the Turkish government at large to see a US ground force in Turkey, which already limits what would be coming to Incirlik Air Base.  Too much in Turkey hinges on working with NATO to open up Incirlik AB which in the foreseeable future just maintaining the Patriot missiles batteries and intelligence surveillance operations from this strategic air base in the region.

Now, what is more interesting is the deployment of US forces in Jordan over the summer.  Back in June, 5000 US personnel were involved in an annual, Jordanian-led military exercise called Eager Lion.  Involving 19 countries and some 8000 troops, Eager Lion as Maj. Gen. Awni al Adwan of the Jordanian army and chairman of the joint task force described, "Issues such as integrated air and missile defense and humanitarian assistance and disaster relief to address current and future conflicts’ security issues."  Afterwards, the US left behind a squadron of F-16s and a Patriot missile battery.

It's interesting to see that the forces in Jordan are in a more convenient strike position than any possible deployment of forces in Turkey, dealing with a more cooperative Jordanian government to keep options open and not be caught by surprise by Turkey not willing to expand the scope of Syrian intervention if the limited strikes failed.  In the past year, it is interesting to note how the Israelis have been making occasional strikes into Syria which probably was with some sort of air-to-surface

F-16 launching a AGM-158 JSSM

standoff weapon. While tomahawk cruise missiles, the F-16 compliment in Jordan probably have something like the AGM-158 JSSM, or AGM-154 JSOW.  Without the carrier strike groups within operational range for strike missions, the only readily available aircraft in the region are those F-16s in Jordan. 

However, Jordan has said that their nation would not be used a platform for any operation against Syria, as stated by information minister Mohammad Moman has said today that the country will "not be a launching pad for any military action against Syria."
He said Jordan preferred a "diplomatic solution to the Syrian crisis" and called on the international community to "consolidate efforts in that regard."

Regional politics and sensitivities of having another ground way have forced a limited hand back in Washington.  If the UN resolution fails, it does indeed falls back to having a NATO backing to see an advancement of the limited strike option.  The world's public is rightly skeptical on getting the evidence right on proving the Syrian government used chemical weapons.  I for one should note that they should have pulled the 'humanitarian' card awhile go if they were going to play that move.  The United States and the Obama Administration does not need another Iraq, which is why toppling Assad isn't possible and arming the Syrian rebels is difficult.  This is a face saving measure and to send a message to everyone else that possesses chemical weapons, "Don't even think about using them, period... or get fucked."

As the UN Security Meets, State Department Deputy Spokesperson Marie Harf said, "We see no avenue forward, given continued Russian opposition, to any meaningful council action on Syria."  Even adding further insult to injury towards Russia, she continued, "Today we've heard nothing different from the Russians in the meeting than we've heard for months and even years."

Meanwhile, the White House is spilling quite a few details of what the military strike option as White House Press Secretary, Jay Carney fielded questions amongst a frenzied White House press.

"Having said that, we’re primarily considering two sets of Tomahawk missile strikes (between 8 and 11) launched by the USS Mahan and the USS Gravely against a set of military bases in the Syrian desert, including but not limited to… [ruffles some papers]… and let me see if I can get these names right: the Marj Ruhayyil Military Airbase, Al-Nayrab Military Airbase, the Suwayda Army Base, the Marj al-Sultan Military Heliport… Wait, no scratch that. My bad. The heliport is not under consideration. I mean, it may or may not be under consideration. Let’s see, where were we? Oh, also the Shayrat Military Airbase and the Khalkh… you know what, I’m not even going to try to pronounce that one.  We’ve put together a list of the potential targets that you can pick up on your way out, along with geographical coordinates and correct spelling, and so on, just to facilitate things."

As the reporters grabbed for details, Carney gave more details... I'm not sure how this is a productive military planning, but it reveals the huge measure to the Syrian government the heads ups...

"Again, we’re not in the business of revealing sensitive information, Judy. All I can tell you is that we may or may not strike the potential targets during the hours of 21:00 and 23:00 on Friday August 30th, and again between 15:00 and 17:00 on Saturday the 31st. Please note that we’re talking about the Damascus time zone, which is GMT +2. I know that can be confusing.  Anyway, after the strikes which may or may not take place between those hours, we may or may not launch a surprise follow-up attack again the following week on Monday morning between 10:30-11:00 am, depending on the situation on the ground."

In return, John McCain on "Fox and Friends" commented the leaks, "But all of these leaks, when strikes are going to take place, where, what’s going to be used, if I were Bashar Assad, I think I would declare tomorrow a snow day and keep everybody from work. This is crazy. These leaks are just crazy.”

In Syria, the public took to heart of the leaks as a Reuters reported stated in Damascus, "At grocery stores, shoppers loaded up on bread, dried goods and canned foods, fearing they may face shortages if a strike hits the city. The items most in demand were batteries and water.  Nearby, a nurse idled in a clinic - empty as nearly no one showed up for their appointments on Wednesday - and raised the question on the mind of so many locals."


At the end of the day, the United Nations will just sit and watch the firework show erupt in the Middle East once again as the United States does what it wants to do in a conflict that it is showing up to a quite a bit late.  For being diplomatic... the Obama Administration has politely told Russia to "Fuck off." as seen what is coming from the State Department.  It will definitely be an interesting next week for sure.   The details are plain to see on what is going to happen, and even when it is happening.  This is a message sending missile strike and nothing more, land-based aircraft strikes are hampered by various regional politics in neighboring countries where there is a US presence, thus the sea-based Tomahawk cruise missile system strikes happening in the coming days.

 



Related news links:
BBC - Syria crisis: Where key countries stand.
BBC - Gauging Russia's reaction to a Syrian Strike
The Guardian - Israeli Intelligence Intercepts Syrian regime talk about chemical attack
Reuters - Obama's Politcal Cost on Syrian Action
Reuters - US Prepares to Strike, Syria prepares.
Hurriyet Daily News - Turkish Government Alone in Intervention Motion
Hurriyet Daily News - Turkey Plans Concrete Goals on Syria
Politico - John McCain Appalled by Syrian Operation Leaks
 

Why Politics is a Petty Thing

I've always questioned why someone or groups of people should be politically active.  I know I'm politically active, but like everything in life, it's really meaningless.  There is only a very few things in the political realm that has survived a decent period of time.  People's interpretation is always askew in their priorities, thinking that a group of representatives can be benevolent enough to represent everyone else.  By far this is a farce, for too many people have individualistic natures, even though common ground can be made for many things; however, people are horrible flip-floppers like Mitt Romney. 

Life is too short to be overly concerned with politics, and the more radical viewpoints shove out the moderate voices which is the majority.  I'm baffled daily that people trust that what happens in various capital's around the world is really ground-breaking work, but it's really not.  Government is by extension a reflection of humanity's indecisiveness, assertiveness in it's own knowledge and in-admittance to the deep imperfections in every individual on this blue planet.  We try to fix things in which are impossible due to our inherent unsavory natures.  We are bringing about an objectively fair world in a world that by it's nature is and forever will be unfair. 

It is admirably to fight the good fight to right the wrongs of the world, but it's a fruitless battle of the ages in which man has yet to win, and probably never win.  The sun rises and sets on history everyday and mankind keeps moving on with the latest evolution of politically correct politics in which is rooted in shallow opinion. 

Good people stay out of politics for good reasons, mainly because it's petty and you can live your life to one's content for the most part if you choose to do so.  Sure, there are those 'white knights' out there seeking appropriate justice and equality for all, but so few are remembered... yet being remembered is not important.  It is just politics is petty since it is, generally speaking, is laying out an opinion of what is perceived to be right or wrong.  It changes with the tides of history, but I suppose I have better things to say what is right or wrong to make it a constant line in the sand and forcefully shouting it out to the rest of the world that this is the way it is and it won't change.  It may not change for me, but I feel I'm wasting my time swaying people to my opinion anyhow.  So instead, I just go out living, doing what I need to do to live life to the fullest, because time can be better spent on other things then arguing endlessly on opinion.

Knowing me: Objective Judging

Sometime ago when I got to Incirlik Air Base, I took one of those personality tests that shows whatever traits I predominantly show.  Over the years, the top traits have rarely shifted; however, each attribute exhibits various rates of growth.  From this test, my top ten traits were

• Judgment, critical thinking, and open-mindedness
• Perspective (wisdom)
• Gratitude
• Curiosity and interest in the world
• Hope, optimism, and future-mindedness
• Love of learning
• Honesty, authenticity, and genuineness
• Appreciation of beauty and excellence
• Humor and playfulness
• Kindness and generosity 

Some folks are taken aback from the first trait exhibiting judgement and in retrospect,  I'm fairly straight-forward with assessing people, because I'm always analyzing them.  Unfortunately, I can only judge base on what I see and know, and with my open-mindedness, I'm a person that desires to know people's life story, desires, goals and put people forward towards them.

I am truly dismayed by the people who dismiss me at first glance because they know I'm actively judging them, but my judgement is for assessment of your character and principles.  Every new thing that you display to me molds my judgement of you to help me understand you better.  It's those people that get my cold stare because they were already closed-minded in the first place, casting the first stone before I could even begin.

I would argue that I display more of my second trait of perspective more, because I understand myself and when I judge, I'm just critical of myself as the people I'm assessing. I know that in the end, the judging, critical thinking, etc trait is the predominant trait, because I think all the time.  However, with wisdom, I can dis spell the terrible effects of negative judgment and come out knowing that I use all ten traits to frame judgement end game.

This is how I exhibit judgement, as objectively as a I can everyday.  I know I come off as a cold-hearted analysis, but those that stick around that can accept the initial foray of an analysis of yourself then can then see the 'whole me'.  I know plenty of people who gotten the same vibe and came out thinking I had the greatest sense of humor ever.

The worse thing is initial judgement, and I've seen people rush faster than I do nearly everyday.  I know people tell me about other people and how they are and what I should watch for, but in the end, I reserve judgment with an open mind.  That is the difference between objective judges like myself and those that lack the fortitude of making judgement on knowing people.


 

Acknowledging Lifelong Learning

Whenever someone I'm getting acquainted with talks with me, one of the subjects of 'getting know this new guy Roger' breaches the subject of future life planning and/or career planning.  These folks quickly realize that I exhibit both specific short-term goals and general road map of long-term goals.  After more discussion, they find that some of the goals, mainly the longer term ones can shift in time frame, but they never leave my focus.  I explain that I see all these possible paths that I could take, but which one takes it's time to reveal itself, sometimes purposely and others accidentally.

I suppose the biggest question now getting to the operational side of the Air Force has been arguably, "Are you making this a career?"  I consider this time period still too early to call really, it really depends after getting to Japan when one logically thinks about it if they were in my situation.  Until then I've explained that CDCs and upgrade training is the most important focal point in life at the moment, followed by enjoying Turkey and the region I'm in at the fullest.

I expound upon this thought to people that life has shown me quite a few lessons that I've heeded before the military and I always keep them in hindsight while I'm here.
1)  The Air Force is just another phase of my finite life.
2) Whenever you're placed in limbo between where you are and where you want to be, be proactive in everything you do.
3) Every event whether good or bad is something to learn from, just don't let bad decisions ruin you're life.
4) History tends to repeat itself, it's best to self-evaluate your past actions constantly to avoid future pitfalls.
5) Five.. no, six constants in life: God, change, choice, principles, learning, and character.
6) The 'drive' of great expectations of doing great things.  Although 'great things' are vague, many small things tend to snowball either positively or negatively, and it may not accumulate into what we call big things.

I've found out that life is a constant lesson in learning about everything.  This definitely excludes the traditional sense of learning, but those 'life lessons' can be found about everyday and it's important to acknowledge them when they occur.  I think many people reach an 'apex' in learning and stop, thinking they mastered everything.

Unfortunately, those people are so woefully wrong and are missing important things in life.  Without risk and an open mind, many people are resigned to a fate of boredom.  This is a tragic consequence that life does not let one forget lightly.  Every new interaction with someone and/or something else is a start of a new lesson in life's education, it's just how you tend to approach it.

In conclusion, don't stop learning, not because you think you've passed college or reached your 'dream' career, because life does not let you stop learning and the faster you get that lesson, the better your life can be.