Voltaire Network
Propaganda ploys

Syria: What the Security Council Said

It is a classic propaganda technique to present a particular opinion as a consensually agreed-on truth such all that those who contest it are made to feel marginalized. Applying this mechanism to Syria, the press outlets of both the West and the Gulf falsely attribute to the UN all kinds of positions that it has never taken. In response to mail from readers, Thierry Meyssan traces these manipulations of vocabulary.

| Damascus (Syria)
+
JPEG - 19.5 kb
"Press: Do not swallow"

The Western and Gulf media have long had the habit of using the expression “international community” to designate groups of states led by the United States to the exclusion of others. One reads with regard to Syria, for example, that “Russia and China oppose the international community” (sic).

The next phase of disinformation has been to include in all press releases the phrase, “The repression has caused more than 10,000 deaths according to the U.N.” Yet the United Nations itself never advanced these figures. They were issued by certain experts in its employ, from the High Commission on Human Rights or the Human Rights Council, specifically. If the U.N. had validated these reports, the Security Council itself would have authorized international intervention. Only the General Assembly and secondarily the Security Council can speak in the name of the United Nations.

The media outlets of the West and Gulf continue to distort the position of Russia, accusing it of being contradictory because, according to them, Moscow has blamed the Syrian opposition for the massacre in Houla when the day before Russia had adopted the Security Council President’s declaration recognizing the responsibility of the Syrian state in the matter. This requires some textual explication.

The fact of condemning the Houla massacre does not mean that the Syrian government stands accused of guilt for having carried it out. The government of Damascas was the first to condemn the atrocities, which it claimed were committed by the armed opposition. A demonstration against the crimes of armed groups was immediately organized in the capital by pro-Assad forces. Currently all the protagonists have condemned the massacre which no one has claimed responsibility for.

The fact of affirming that the Syrian government is responsible for the massacre does not mean accusing it of being guilty of having committed it. By virtue of the principle of national independence and sovereignty, a government is responsible for all that happens on its territory. Affirming this responsibility is the recognition of its prerogatives in terms of responding to the event. The Security Council proposal signifies the exact inverse of what the media would have us believe: it affirms that the Syrian government has the duty to intervene to protect its own population and that the use of force is thereby legitimate.

Urging the Syrian government not use heavy armaments in populated zones by virtue of Resolutions 2042 and 2043 neither signifies that it is thereby responsible for committing massacres in these zones nor that it is prohibited to act to repress the crimes of the armed opposition, but rather that it is called on to employ a proportional use of force. The Security Council construes that the disturbances to public order are to be treated as police problems and not as a civil war. It expects, henceforth, that Syrian authorities will establish order without using artillery—which inevitably creates collateral victims—even if the rebels are themselves employing heavy weaponry.

The declarations of the Security Council are the outcome of a consensus among the great powers. The vocabulary used should be understood in the strictest sense. Any other interpretation is actively distorting. The Council did not validate the allegations of the High Commission of Human Rights accusing the government of having killed 10,000 peaceful demonstrators in one year. The Council did not attribute guilt for the Houla massacre to the Syrian government. Russia did not vary its position.

Translation
Michele Stoddard

Don’t let the media distort reality: write to journalists who report the positions of the UN incorrectly and urge them to correct their articles. Interact with media Internet forums to correct truncated or incorrect citations.

Thierry Meyssan

Thierry Meyssan French intellectual, founder and chairman of Voltaire Network and the Axis for Peace Conference. His columns specializing in international relations feature in daily newspapers and weekly magazines in Arabic, Spanish and Russian. His last two books published in English : 9/11 the Big Lie and Pentagate.

 
The Beginning of World Shift
The Beginning of World Shift
Russian Strategy in the Face of Anglo-American Imperialism
 
Voltaire Network

Voltaire, international edition

Article licensed under Creative Commons

The articles on Voltaire Network may be freely reproduced provided the source is cited, their integrity is respected and they are not used for commercial purposes (license CC BY-NC-ND).

Support Voltaire Network

You visit this website to seek quality analysis that enables you to forge your own understanding of today’s world. In order to continue our work, we need you to support our efforts.
Help us by making a contribution.

How to participate in Voltaire Network?

The members of our team are all volunteers.
- Authors : diplomats, economists, geographers, historians, journalists, military servicemen, philosophers, sociologists. You can send us your article proposals.
- Professional-level mother-tongue translators: you can help us by translating our articles.