Saving World Heritage – the West’s New R2P Pretext | WHAT REALLY HAPPENED

Saving World Heritage – the West’s New R2P Pretext

The ideological arsenal of pretexts for US military interventions are depleted, redundant, spent or thoroughly disgraced.

Is the defence of world heritage sites in Iraq the new «responsibility to protect» (R2P) doctrine to justify Western intervention in the geo-strategically important region? The timing coincides with renewed admonitions from the United States and Saudi Arabia for a coalition of ground forces to defeat the Islamic State network in Iraq and Syria – and just when Iraqi and Syrian forces appear to be decisively pushing back the extremists in both countries.

The US and its Western allies have long used the doctrine of «responsibility to protect» or «R2P» as a flimsy pretext for military intervention.They found success with various tropes, including the «War on Terror», the elimination of «weapons of mass destruction», and the Responsibility to Protect» human rights.

The suspicion is that the West is preparing to use this powerful emotive backdrop as a new pretext to justify military intervention. This seems especially the case because erstwhile pretexts, such as «protecting human rights», have run out of credibility as a political lever on public opinion.

Comments

SHARE THIS ARTICLE WITH YOUR SOCIAL MEDIA