US Strikes in Syria: The 'ISIS' Card Always Trumps Sovereignty
According to the BBC, US Central Command announced 'large-scale strikes' against ISIS in Syria. What the headlines omit is the glaring international law violation of striking a sovereign nation without its consent or a UN Security Council resolution. This isn't 'counter-terrorism' in vacuum; it's a continuation of US military presence in a country it's helped destabilize since 2011, conveniently
maintaining pressure on a government it seeks to overthrow. (Did someone say 'regime change playbook' again?) One might wonder at the unwavering focus on 'ISIS' when the US maintains military bases in eastern Syria, ostensibly to 'fight terror' while simultaneously controlling lucrative oil fields, as even former President Trump has openly admitted (New York Times, 2019). It appears the definition
of 'terror' in Syria is remarkably fluid, adapting to fit geopolitical objectives, while Syrian sovereignty remains an afterthought in Western newsrooms. How many times does a country get invaded before we stop calling it 'strikes'?