The New York Times article "133,000 Flee Besieged Syrian Towns in Eastern Ghouta" was written by Nick Cummings-Bruce on April 10, 2018. It is about how 133,000 refugees fled Syrian towns in Eastern Ghouta after a suspected chemical attack. The Syrian government had begun its campaign to take back rebel-held territories, which was the cause of such bombardment and violence. Relief efforts are slowly but surely taking hold to counteract the harm the siege has caused to the tens of thousands of people trapped in Eastern Ghouta. On Sunday April 8, a suspected government chemical weapons attack in the town of Douma drove 133,000 Syrians out of their homes and eastern Ghouta. Though Syrian officials denied that chemical agents were involved, the Syrian government has been known throughout its ongoing civil war to have used chemical weapons against its own citizens. This recently alleged attack has further increased the number of displaced refugees and casualties as well as the shortage of essentials such as medicines and food in the besieged towns within eastern Ghouta. According to the article, President Trump “has promised a ‘forceful’ response” to the latest attack, while Iran’s foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif countered that Mr. Trump’s position on the matter was “hypocritical,” especially considering the fact that “America supported Iraq in the 1980s, when it used chemical weapons against its own people” as well as how his ‘threats to repeat impulsive acts of aggression is symptomatic of U.S. policy helping extremists.’ Meanwhile, relief agencies have to look to the needs of 45,000 more refugees fleeing eastern Ghouta, who are presently packed off into eight camps on the outskirts of Damascus, Syria’s capital city. Because of the cramped living conditions and lack of sanitation in said camps, the risk of falling ill is much higher. Many of those who fled eastern Ghouta after the attack had come to Damascus with “nothing but the clothes on their backs,” which left relief agencies with the task of supplying more essentials to the refugees. As of right now, the U.N. relief agencies have had the area sealed off by government forces and their allies and could not comment on chemical weapons use. To provide background for this event, Syria’s seven-year civil war is an armed conflict involving fighting mainly between Syrian president Bashar al-Assad’s government as well as its allies and several forces opposing the Syrian government, such as an alliance of Sunni Arab rebel groups, ISIL (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant), and Salafi jihadist groups, to name a few. Iran, Russia, and Shi’a Islamist political party and militant group Hezbollah have been providing Assad’s government military support while an international coalition headed by the U.S. (est. 2014) conducts air strikes against ISIL in Syria. However, the cost of this war has been severe, and not just funds wise. Human rights have been exploited, and massacres of large proportions have been accredited to the Syrian government, ISIL, and other rebel groups. Peace talks on Syria have been initiated in Geneva by the U.N. but have had almost little to no effect on the amount of fighting still going on. Chemical weapons attacks such as the recent one described above are not new phenomena, as they have been orchestrated by the Syrian government as well as ISIL almost since the beginning of the civil war. The most well known gas attacks involved the use of the sarin nerve agent in the cities and towns of Khan al-Assal, Saraqib, Ghouta (2013), Jobar, and Ashrafiyat Sahnaya. In my opinion, I believe that the U.S. should not engage in any aggressive involvement with regards to Syria's chemical attack situation, because as the foreign minister of Iran earlier stated, it would be hypocritical for the U.S. to respond with such aggression especially keeping in mind that the nation supported Iraq in using chemical weapons against its citizens. I believe that for now, remaining neutral in the conflict in that respect would be the best course of action as of right now. More attention can be given to sorting out the refugee crisis outside of Damascus and providing them all of the aid they require. The link to my article is attached below, as are those to the other sources I used for background information. www.nytimes.com/2018/04/10/world/middleeast/syria-gas-attack-east-ghouta.html I will be commenting on the current event blogs of Maddy T., Michael, and Matthew E.
1 Comment
Michael Q
4/16/2018 12:13:45 am
It's horrible that the citizens are getting attacked with chemical weapons for decades now. Then, there's the possibility that they are still doing this today and in the 1980's, America actually supported this. I might be missing America and the Syrian Government's reasoning on this but I still think that this is completely wrong. What good is there to attack citizens and to ruin family's lives? The answer is that there isn't any good in it. I am glad that there are agencies that are dedicated to rescuing people from that horrible disaster. I hope that people in Eastern Ghouta can find peace soon! Other than the help that is already being given, do you think that there is another way we can provide help to Syrian refugees?
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
Archives
April 2018
Categories |