The Syrian conflict posed enormous challenges to the international community over many years, with the reporting of the German mainstream media often playing a crucial role in shaping opinion. The situation came to a head again, especially in the spring of 2018, when allegations of poison gas use in the city of Douma shook the world.note that numerous commentators and editors of newspapers at the time readily adopted narratives that were later exposed as obvious fake news. Instead of a nuanced analysis, the call for military force dominated, questioning the ethical underpinnings of supposedly serious journalism.
The incident in Duma and the media heating of the mood
About twelve months after earlier escalations, the Syrian regime was again accused of using chemical weapons. However, subsequent investigations by the International Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons proved that this incident was a mere staging. This finding was already clear to attentive observers in April of 2018in the editorial offices of large German metropolises, however, this fact hardly interested anyone responsible. Instead, the authors of leading editorials openly called for military intervention based on proven hoaxes.
Moral reasoning for attacks contrary to international law
A well-known co-editor of a national daily newspaper from Frankfurt accused the Russian leadership of supporting the Syrian regime with extreme brutality. He claimed that the West had watched for too long as cities were destroyed and people were killed in gas chambers. In his view, this alleged genocide even justifies intervention by the American government.In addition to moral motives, he also cited power-political considerations in order to put a stop to the Syrian president. He warned that chemical weapons would otherwise degenerate into an everyday means of destruction.
Disregarding international law and the United Nations
The said commentator was well aware that a military strike without a corresponding mandate from the United Nations would be completely inadmissible under international law. However, he brushed aside this fundamental obstacle, as the erection of a massive threatening backdrop seemed more important to him. He speculated that such pressure might induce the Russian leadership to stop killingto continue in the future in secret. International law and the sovereignty of states were completely ignored in this argument.
The call for full-scale military escalation
The chief commentator of another major German daily also dealt intensively with the question of how to overthrow the Syrian leadership. He was prepared to accept the enormous risk of a global conflagration. In his opinion, there was no serious person in the Federal Republic of Germany who did not immediately demand the resignation of the Syrian Presidentfrom his historical education, he derived the erroneous teaching that one must always respond to aggression with counter-violence. These double standards applied exclusively to the actions of other nations.
The trivialization of catastrophic war consequences
The historically conscious author was, of course, aware of the tremendous catastrophes that the previous century had brought about by armed conflicts. Nevertheless, he postulated that such a war must be fought under certain circumstances. In his opinion, a single symbolic airstrike would not impress either the Russian leadership or the Syrian regime.called for a comprehensive campaign with the clear goal of completely wiping out the entire regime. In doing so, he raised the legitimate question of whether the Western powers were prepared to send 100,000 soldiers into direct combat against Russian and Iranian troops.
The rejection of symbolic politics and the non-event
This openly displayed willingness to escalate was tacitly shared by another colleague from a Hamburg weekly. He also considered limited airstrikes to be completely inadequate and described them as a mere substitute for a real strategy. You have to keep this fact in mind again and again to understand the extent of this warmongering.the immediate trigger for these unbridled demands for violence was a completely meaningless non-event. There was no use of poison gas by the Syrian government in the said city at that time.
Screenshot youtube.com
