United Nations Advisory Council

At the United Nations (UN) Advisory Council meeting on friday the twelve members discussed the roiling state of the Syrian country. The events of the past two weeks, the roots of this conflict, and possible resolutions were reviewed and discussed. Each advisory council member appeared to have an exemplary grasp on the situation in Syria as it is today. There was a unanimous agreement that the use of the chemical weapon sarin is morally wrong and an international war crime.  The death toll was said to be 1429. The Assad Regime is the main governing body of Syria, and the Syrian National Council is the leading group for the rebellion. Most representatives agreed that action should be taken, but many were wary of taking direct military action.

Many variables that had to be taken into account before any discussion about taking action occurred. Not all members were convinced that Assad carried out the chemical attack. Evidence that was proposed was that when Secretary of State John Kerry requested for the Syrian government to leave that site of attack open for investigation, they obliterated the site with devastating artillery. To many this is enough, but for some, especially those sympathetic to Syria, a confession or other hard evidence is required. Many members were against the Syrian government was because of it dictatorial nature and history. When Bahsar "ran" for president, there was no opposition, and he won with 97% of the vote. This indicates an unfair election and a fake democracy. 

The first proposed method of intervention was a direct military intervention. This would involve soldiers, missile strikes, air superiority. This could cause much more problems than it has the potential to solve. Even if Assad is routed, the people could elect someone who is unfit to rule. Assad also released a statement that if military action is taken, then they, along with Iran will attack the UN troops and possibly even Israel. 

Another proposition was to threaten drone strikes and weapon inspection (and destruction). The representatives were not pleased with this proposed course of action either.  The members were afraid of the near inevitable collateral damage from drone strikes, if a chemical weapon was hit with a drone strike it would cause unspeakable devastation.

The final proposed course of action was to impose international economic sanctions against Syria and to aid the refugees. This was the most widely accepted proposal. It was said that this will help with the deplorable conditions that the hundreds of thousands of refugees are living in every day. However, it is believed that the economic sanctions would just slow down the inevitable conflict. The humanitarian effort to help the refugees was near unanimously seen as a good idea.

This is truly a crisis that is affecting everyone across the world, and a resolution is needed soon. We, the human race, can not sit by and wait while innocent civilians, even children, who had their whole lives ahead of them, are being mercilessly slaughtered.