Red line (phrase)

Last updated

The red line, or "to cross the red line", is a phrase used worldwide to mean a figurative point of no return or line in the sand, or "the fastest, farthest, or highest point or degree considered safe." [1] [2]

Contents

Origins

The origin of the phrase in English traces back to the "Red Line Agreement" in 1928 between the largest oil companies of Britain, the USA, and France at the time of the end of the Ottoman Empire. At the time of signature, the former empire's borders were unclear. To remedy the problem, Armenian businessman Calouste Gulbenkian took a red pencil to draw arbitrarily the borders of the divided empire.[ citation needed ]

The expression remained significant to global diplomacy and was reused during the UN's founding after WWII, especially in the English-speaking world. Uniquely, in France, one would "cross the yellow line" (franchir la ligne jaune). [3]

History of usage

In Israel, the phrase was notably used as a political metaphor by Foreign Minister Yigal Allon in 1975, when he said that Washington "has managed to draw a red line which all the Arab countries know they must not cross - that America is not going to sacrifice Israel for the sake of Arab support." [2] Yitzhak Rabin later used the phrase to refer to the line past which the Syrian Army should not be allowed to cross after the 1976 occupation of Lebanon. On September 27, 2012, at the 67th United Nations General Assembly at the UN Headquarters in New York City in a speech addressing Iran's nuclear program, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu publicly added a red line to a prepared bomb cartoon. [4]

According to Ben Yagoda, a professor of English and journalism at the University of Delaware, in 1987, there are references to "red lines" in conflicts between Chad and Libya. In a 1999 New York Times article, Muslim clerics in Iran are reported to draw a "'red line for the revolution' that no one should cross." [5] These references occurred earlier as well, appearing a Milwaukee Sentinel article of 26 January 1984 regarding French intervention in Chad and a "red line" held by French forces in southern Chad. [6]

The phrase has been used by US diplomats going back to the 1990s. For example, US officials, quoted by Reuters news agency in May 1994, used the term about negotiations with North Korea over the withdrawal of reactor fuel; and Martin Walker in The Guardian used the same phrase in June, about statements by United States officials. [7] Secretary of State Warren Christopher used the phrase about NATO control over the peace-keeping mission in the Bosnian War on the CBS program Face the Nation on 22 October 1995. [8] Barack Obama used the phrase on August 20, 2012, during the Syrian civil war concerning chemical weapons, [9] saying that "We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my calculus. That would change my equation." [10] [2]

In the US, the phrase then became a source of contention when political opponent John McCain said the red line was "apparently written in disappearing ink" due to the perception the red line had been crossed with no action. [5] [2] On the first anniversary of Obama's red line speech, the Ghouta chemical attacks occurred. Obama then clarified, "I didn't set a red line. The world set a red line when governments representing 98 percent of the world's population said the use of chemical weapons are abhorrent and passed a treaty forbidding their use even when countries are engaged in war" about the Chemical Weapons Convention. [11]

Thin Red Line

The Thin Red Line (1881) by Robert Gibb, depicting the 93rd Regiment of Foot of the British army fighting off Russian cavalry at the Battle of Balaclava in 1854 Robert Gibb - The Thin Red Line.jpg
The Thin Red Line (1881) by Robert Gibb, depicting the 93rd Regiment of Foot of the British army fighting off Russian cavalry at the Battle of Balaclava in 1854

From British English, an entirely different figure of speech for an act of great courage against impossible order or thinly spread military unit holding firm against attack, or the "thin red line", originates from reports of a red-coated Scottish regiment at the Battle of Balaclava during the Crimean War. [12] [2] A journalist described a "thin red streak tipped with a line of steel" with the appearance of the 93rd (Highland) Regiment and parts of the Turkish army as they stood before (and repelled) a vastly superior force of Russian cavalry. The reference was soon shortened into the thin red line, [13] and famously described by Rudyard Kipling in the poem Tommy as "the thin red line of 'eroes [heroes]." [2]

Notable literary uses included George Orwell who in A Clergyman's Daughter invented a book-within-a-book called the "Hundred Page History of Britain, a 'nasty little duodecimo book' of 1888, which declared anachronistically that Napoleon 'soon found that in the "thin red line" he had more than met his match.'" [9] American author James Jones later used The Thin Red Line as the title of his 1962 novel about the Battle of Guadalcanal, helping to further popularize its usage.

Its popularity of this use in the USA has increased since the Andrew Marton's 1964 movie and Terrence Malick's 1998 movie of Jones's novel, the latter of which was ranked as one of the ten best action and war films of all time. [14]

The basic idea was extended in the 20th century to apply to police officers, such as The Thin Blue Line, about the frequently blue color of police uniforms.

See also

Related Research Articles

The Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare, usually called the Geneva Protocol, is a treaty prohibiting the use of chemical and biological weapons in international armed conflicts. It was signed at Geneva on 17 June 1925 and entered into force on 8 February 1928. It was registered in League of Nations Treaty Series on 7 September 1929. The Geneva Protocol is a protocol to the Convention for the Supervision of the International Trade in Arms and Ammunition and in Implements of War signed on the same date, and followed the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907.

Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) is a group of former officers of the United States Intelligence Community formed in January 2003. In February 2003, the group issued a statement accusing the Bush administration of misrepresenting U.S. national intelligence information in order to push the US and its allies toward that year's US-led invasion of Iraq. The group issued a letter stating that intelligence analysts were not being heeded by policy makers. The group initially numbered 25, mostly retired analysts.

In the context of global politics, a policy of deliberate ambiguity is the practice by a government or non-state actor of being deliberately ambiguous with regard to all or certain aspects of its operational or positional policies. This is typically a way to avoid direct conflict while maintaining a masked more assertive or threatening position on a subject.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Israel–United States relations</span> Bilateral relations

The United States was the first country to recognize the nascent State of Israel. Since the 1960s, the relationship between Israel and the United States has grown into a mutually beneficial alliance in economic, strategic and military aspects. The United States has provided strong support for Israel. It has played a key role in the promotion of good relations between Israel and its neighbouring Arab states—notably Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt—while holding off hostility from countries such as Syria and Iran. In turn, Israel provides a strategic American foothold in the region as well as intelligence and advanced technological partnerships in both the civilian and military worlds. During the Cold War, Israel was a vital counterweight to Soviet influence in the region. Relations with Israel are an important factor in the U.S. government's overall foreign policy in the Middle East, and the U.S. Congress has placed considerable importance on the maintenance of a supportive relationship.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Russia–United States relations</span> Bilateral relations

The United States and Russia maintain one of the most important, critical, and strategic foreign relations in the world. Both nations have shared interests in nuclear safety and security, nonproliferation, counterterrorism, and space exploration. Due to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, relations became very tense after the United States imposed sanctions against Russia. Russia placed the United States on a list of "unfriendly countries".

Military action against Iran is a controversial topic in Israel and the United States. Proponents of a strike against Iran point to the threat presented by Iran's nuclear program as a casus belli. Many Israelis, and particularly hardline politicians such as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, American neoconservatives, Iranian dissidents support military action to stop the program or go further to overthrow the regime. Opposition to military action is often based in pacifism, but some who are opposed to military action against Iran are opposed for other reasons.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Syria and weapons of mass destruction</span>

Syria and weapons of mass destruction deals with the research, manufacture, stockpiling and alleged use by Syria of weapons of mass destruction, which include chemical and nuclear weapons.

Line in the sand is an idiom, a metaphorical point beyond which no further advance will be accepted or made.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Foreign policy of the Barack Obama administration</span> United States foreign policy from 2009 to 2017

The term Obama Doctrine is frequently used to describe the principles of US foreign policy under the Obama administration (2009–2017). He relied chiefly on his two highly experienced Secretaries of State—Hillary Clinton (2009–2013) and John Kerry (2013–2017)—and Vice President Joe Biden. Main themes include a reliance on negotiation and collaboration rather than confrontation or unilateralism.

The Barack Obama administration's involvement in the Middle East was greatly varied between the region's various countries. Some nations, such as Libya and Syria, were the subject of offensive action at the hands of the Obama administration, while nations such as Bahrain and Saudi Arabia received arms deliveries. Notable achievements of the administration include inhibiting the Iranian nuclear program, while his handling of certain situations, such as the Syrian civil war, were highly criticized.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Foreign involvement in the Syrian civil war</span> Political, military and operational support to parties involved in the ongoing conflict in Syria

Foreign involvement in the Syrian civil war refers to political, military and operational support to parties involved in the ongoing conflict in Syria that began in March 2011, as well as active foreign involvement. Most parties involved in the war in Syria receive various types of support from foreign countries and entities based outside Syria. The ongoing conflict in Syria is widely described as a series of overlapping proxy wars between the regional and world powers, primarily between the United States and Russia as well as between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">U.S.–Russia peace proposals on Syria</span>

The U.S.–Russia peace proposals on Syria refers to several American–Russian initiatives, including joint United States–Russia proposal issued in May 2013 to organize a conference for obtaining a political solution to the Syrian Civil War. The conference was eventually mediated by Lakhdar Brahimi, the United Nations peace envoy for Syria.

There have been numerous reports of chemical weapons attacks in the Syrian Civil War, beginning in 2012, and corroborated by national governments, the United Nations (UN), the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), Human Rights Watch (HRW), and media organizations. The attacks occurred in different areas of Syria, including Khan al-Assal, Jobar, Saraqib, Ashrafiyat Sahnaya, Kafr Zita, Talmenes, Sarmin and Douma. The deadliest attacks were the August 2013 sarin attack in Ghouta, the April 2017 sarin attack in Khan Shaykhun and April 2018 Douma chemical attacks. The most common agent used is chlorine, with sarin and sulphur mustard also reported. Almost half of the attacks between 2014 and 2018 were delivered via aircraft and less than a quarter were delivered from the ground, with the remaining attacks having an undetermined method of delivery. Since the start of uprisings across Syria in 2011, Syrian Arab Armed Forces and pro-Assad paramilitary forces have been implicated in more than 300 chemical attacks in Syria.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ghouta chemical attack</span> 2013 gas attack during the Syrian Civil War

The Ghouta chemical attack was a chemical attack carried out by the forces of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, in the early hours of 21 August 2013 in Ghouta, Syria during the Syrian civil war. Two opposition-controlled areas in the suburbs around Damascus were struck by rockets containing the chemical agent sarin. Estimates of the death toll range from at least 281 people to 1,729. The attack was the deadliest use of chemical weapons since the Iran–Iraq War.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against the Government of Syria to Respond to Use of Chemical Weapons</span> 2013 US Senate Joint Resolution

The Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against the Government of Syria to Respond to Use of Chemical Weapons is a United States Senate Joint Resolution that would have authorized President Barack Obama to use the American military to intervene in the ongoing Syrian Civil War. The bill was filed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on September 6, 2013 in a specially scheduled pro forma Senate session that took place during the last week of the August recess. The bill would have authorized only 60 days of military action, with the possibility of a one-time extension of 30 days. The bill would have specifically prohibited the use of ground troops. However, this bill never received a floor vote in either the House or Senate.

International reactions to the Ghouta chemical attack of 21 August 2013 were widespread. The Ghouta chemical attack was a chemical weapons attack in Damascus, Syria during the Syrian Civil War. United States President Barack Obama said that the U.S. military should strike targets in Syria in retaliation for the government's purported use of chemical weapons—a proposal supported by French President François Hollande but opposed by the Syrian government's closest allies, Iran and Russia. Although the Arab League said it would support military action against Syria in the event of U.N. support, league members Iraq, Lebanon, Egypt, Tunisia and Algeria opposed intervention. On 14 September the U.S. and Russia announced an agreement on the Framework for Elimination of Syrian Chemical Weapons to destroy the Syria stockpile of chemical weapons and its production facilities, and Syria agreed to sign the Chemical Weapons Convention. The United Nations Security Council also passed Resolution 2118.

Syria's chemical weapons program began in the 1970s with weapons and training from Egypt and the Soviet Union, with production of chemical weapons in Syria beginning in the mid-1980s. For some time, Syria was believed to have the world's third-largest stockpile of chemical weapons, after the United States and Russia. Prior to September 2013 Syria had not publicly admitted to possessing chemical weapons, although Western intelligence services believed it to hold one of the world's largest stockpiles. In September 2013, French intelligence put the Syrian stockpile at 1,000 tonnes, including Yperite, VX and "several hundred tonnes of sarin". At the time, Syria was one of a handful of states which had not ratified the Chemical Weapons Convention. In September 2013, Syria joined the CWC, and agreed to the destruction of its weapons, to be supervised by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), as required by the convention. A joint OPCW-United Nations mission was established to oversee the destruction process. Syria joined OPCW after international condemnation of the August 2013 Ghouta chemical attack, for which Western states held the Syrian government responsible and agreed to the prompt destruction of its chemical weapons, resulting in U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry declaring on 20 July 2014: "we struck a deal where we got 100 percent of the chemical weapons out." The destruction of Syria's chemical weapons that the Assad government had declared was completed by August 2014, yet further disclosures, incomplete documentation, and allegations of withholding part of Syria's chemical weapons stockpile since mean that serious concerns regarding chemical weapons and related sites in Syria remain. On 5 April 2017, the government of Syria allegedly unleashed a chemical attack that killed 70 civilians. A suspected chemical attack on Douma on 9 April 2018 that killed at least 49 civilians has been blamed on the Syrian Government.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Destruction of Syria's chemical weapons</span> Part of the Syrian peace process

The destruction of Syria's chemical weapons began on 14 September 2013 after Syria entered into several international agreements which called for the elimination of Syria's chemical weapon stockpiles and set a destruction deadline of 30 June 2014. Also on 14 September 2013, Syria acceded to the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) and agreed to its provisional application pending its entry into force on 14 October. Having acceded to the CWC, the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) Executive Council on 27 September approved a detailed implementation plan that required Syria to assume responsibility for and follow a timeline for the destruction of Syrian chemical weapons and Syrian chemical weapon production facilities. Following the signing of the Framework Agreement on 14 September 2013 and after the OPCW implementation plan, on 27 September the United Nations Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 2118 which bound Syria to the timetable set out in the OPCW implementation plan. The joint OPCW-UN mission was established to oversee the implementation of the destruction program.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Egypt and weapons of mass destruction</span> Aspect of Egypts military history

Egypt had a history of weapons of mass destruction and used chemical weapons during the North Yemen Civil War. Although it has signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, it still remains one of only four countries not to ratify the Chemical Weapons Convention and has not ratified the Biological Weapons Convention.

The U.S. Government Assessment of the Syrian Government's Use of Chemical Weapons on August 21, 2013 was a report published by the United States Government on the Ghouta chemical attack on August 21, 2013. The 4-page summary document and map was publicly released on August 30. A 12-page classified summary was made available for members of Congress. The report declared that "the United States Government assesses with high confidence that the Syrian government carried out a chemical weapons attack in the Damascus suburbs on August 21, 2013. We further assess that the regime used a nerve agent in the attack."

References

  1. ↑ "Redline - Definition". Merriam-webster.com. 2012-08-31. Retrieved 2013-08-28.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Ben Zimmer (July 19, 2013). "The Long History of the Phrase 'Red Line'". Wall Street Journal . Archived from the original on 2015-01-20.
  3. ↑ Alexander Melnik, Professor of Geopolitics. Diplomatie : d'où vient l'expression "franchir la ligne rouge" ?
  4. ↑ Jeffrey Heller, Associated Press. Netanyahu draws "red line" on Iran's nuclear program
  5. 1 2 Smith, Roff (7 May 2013). "red line". National Geographic News. Archived from the original on 2017-10-11.
  6. ↑ "French plans attack invading Chad rebels," Milwaukee Sentinel, 26 January 1984.
  7. ↑ Steve Pagani, "U.N. Nuclear Experts in North Korea," Reuters wire article, 19 May 1994; Martin Walker, "North Korea 'has crossed red line' " The Guardian , 1 June 1994.
  8. ↑ "1,000 Muslims start trek home as Bosnian truce finally holds," Toledo Blade, 23 October 1995.
  9. 1 2 Wordsworth, Dot (8 June 2013). "What, exactly, is a 'red line'?". The Spectator magazine. Retrieved 30 July 2013.
  10. ↑ BAKER, PETER (May 4, 2013). "Off-the-Cuff Obama Line Put U.S. in Bind on Syria". The New York Times . Retrieved 30 July 2013.
  11. ↑ Michele Richinick (September 4, 2013). "Obama: 'I didn't set a red line, the world set a red line'". MSNBC . Retrieved September 4, 2013.
  12. ↑ "Overview, "The Thin Red Line" Balaklava, 1854". The Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders. Archived from the original on 2 June 2013. Retrieved 30 July 2013.
  13. ↑ Dot Wordsworth, The Spectator magazine, dated 8 June 2013
  14. ↑ David Thomson (19 October 2010). "The Thin Red Line: No 10 best action and war film of all time". The Guardian . Retrieved August 16, 2018.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.