http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2011/05/26/hugo-chavez-monthly-review-and-the-syrian-torture-state/

Louis Proyect: The Unrepentant Marxist <http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/>
May 26, 2011
Hugo Chavez, Monthly Review, and the Syrian torture
state<http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2011/05/26/hugo-chavez-monthly-review-and-the-syrian-torture-state/>
Filed under: Syria <http://en.wordpress.com/tag/syria/> — louisproyect @
3:28 pm

On November 2, 2009, MRZine published an
article<http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2009/cohn110209.html>by
National Lawyers Guild president Marjorie Cohn that concluded:

The U.S. government should disclose the identities, fate, and current
whereabouts of all persons detained by the CIA or rendered to foreign
custody by the CIA since 2001.  Those who ordered renditions should be
prosecuted.  And the special task force should recommend, and Obama should
agree to, an end to all renditions.

Among the victims of extraordinary rendition mentioned in Cohn’s article is
a Canadian citizen of Syrian origin who was kidnapped and sent to Syria in
2002. After his ordeal, he used an Arabic expression to describe the pain he
experienced: “you forget the milk that you have been fed from the breast of
your mother.”

The president of Syria at that time was Bashar al-Assad, who assumed power
in 2000 after his father’s death. We do know why his fellow
“anti-imperialist” Qaddafi collaborated with the CIA in extraordinary
renditions. It was a way to demonstrate that he could be relied on as part
of a new relationship with the U.S. that would benefit Libya economically.
While sanctions had also been imposed against Syria, they never were as
severe as those used against Libya. It appears that both nations had an
incentive in working with the CIA since the victims were supposedly al-Qaeda
militants who were hostile to the kind of corrupt post-Nasserist politics
that Qaddafi and al-Assad represented. While accepting the possibility that
any society has the right to protect itself against terrorists, is it too
much to ask that those accused have the right to a lawyer and a fair trial?
That is what Marjorie Cohn advocates and what we would expect socialists to
stand for. When socialists lend their support to torture states, such as the
CP’s did in the 30s, they compromise their principles and deserve to be
condemned by those who believe that without democracy there can be no
socialism.

That is why it is so disconcerting to see the very same publication that
printed Cohn’s article now have the same relationship to Syria that the CP’s
had to Stalin’s USSR: base apologists. It is doubly troubling to see Hugo
Chavez participating in this sordid exercise.

The Venezuela Foreign Ministry issued a statement on Syria that appears on
MRZine today. All of it is garbage but this is particularly offensive:

President Hugo Chávez received from President Bashar al-Assad a complete
picture of the real situation in this brother Arab nation, where a fascist
conspiracy is seeking to sow chaos and disorder, with the goal of subjecting
the nation to the dictates of the Western powers.

For those who were politically active in the U.S. during the Nixon
presidency, it is mordantly amusing to see the Venezuelans using the
“outside agitator” rhetoric perfected by Spiro Agnew:* *

President Hugo Chávez was able to hear firsthand the important process of
reforms that President Bashar has pushed forward for the purposes of
responding to the legitimate needs and demands of those who have exercised
their right to demonstrate peacefully and who have nothing to do with the
extremist groups armed and financed from abroad.

The notion that Bashar al-Assad is some kind of anti-imperialist fighter
standing up to the “dictates of Western powers” can only be upheld if one
ignores any reports contrary to your own addled worldview.

A cool-headed 
report<http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/05/unholy-alliance-how-syria-is-bringing-israel-iran-and-saudi-arabia-together/238084/>by
Steven A. Cook appeared on the Atlantic Monthly website that punctures
the overheated rhetoric of MRZine and other al-Assad apologists:

As the world (slowly) comes to grips with the horror of Syria and the
Assads, there remains a coalition of nations that appear to be acting under
the belief that the Assad regime is better than what might come next. It’s
an odd group in the rather strange new world of the Middle East: Israel,
Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Turkey. For the Israelis, already reeling from the
loss of a regional strategic asset — Hosni Mubarak’s Egypt — the
predictability of Assad’s Syria was some consolation. Israel and Syria may
be in a technical state of war, but the Syrians have scrupulously kept the
armistice on the Golan Heights and it has been a long time since Syria’s
military posed any significant security threat to Israel. The Israelis put a
premium on authoritarian stability in the Arab world, where they fear change
will almost always rebound to the benefit of hostile Islamist groups.
Sitting in Tel Aviv or Jerusalem, it is little wonder the Israeli leadership
is having serious qualms about the unrest in Syria. Assad may be an
implacable foe, but he is better than the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood. From
the perspective of the Israeli security establishment, at least Assad is
doing what Hosni Mubarak should have done: using all available means to save
his regime.

Finally, it should be understood that others besides MRZine and Hugo Chavez
view al-Assad as a “reformer”. One levelheaded American leader has
said<http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-27/u-s-won-t-intervene-in-syria-unrest-clinton-says-on-cbs.html>that
the elements that led to intervention in Libya — international
condemnation, an Arab League call for action, a United Nations Security
Council resolution — are “not going to happen” with Syria, in part because
members of the U.S. Congress from both parties say they believe Assad is “a
reformer.”

*This is the same administration official that has now acted to impose
sanctions on the state-owned Petroleos de Venezuela SA for knowing that it
was “providing sanctionable goods or services to Iran.” That was from a
statement from the U.S. State Department whose secretary—Hillary
Clinton—also was the very same official who described al-Assad as a
“reformer”.*

What a sorry state of affairs when the chief spokesperson for 21th century
socialism and a socialist magazine that has been publishing for a
half-century can’t figure these things out for themselves.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to