democracy now has had it's head lodged in it's rear around the syria issue for years, now. it still doesn't seem to have figured out that there never was an internal uprising, and these people they pull in are a combination of western intelligence agents and their naive useful idiots.

what should the united nations do about the situation?

well, where is international law being broken?

1) the russians were invited by the syrians.
2) the turks were invited by the russians.

so, they are not breaking international law.

however, nobody invited the kurds. and, nobody invited the americans.

it is the kurds and the americans that are in breach of international law, here. so, the united nations really ought to be acting to fund an expeditionary force to expel the americans and kurds, and reassert syrian sovereignty over the east of the country.

but, that would start a war, you say.

no. it would be the american refusal to withdraw, and obey international law that would spark the war. the united nations has a mandate to uphold international law. it can't be avoiding conflict out of consequence, it has to lay the law down on the americans and kurds, who are operating as a rogue state.

and, it is the activist left that is eating cake, here. for, it wants to argue that the united nations should step in to protect the kurds, under a concept of international law that it pulled out of it's ass. rather, a legal un operation would differ from a turkish force only in ability. the turks are the ones upholding the law, here.

we have entered a new world, where the russians are the ones upholding the rule of law, and america is the rogue state that requires sanctions.