The stance adopted by Malta along with its EU peers this week on dropping the Syrian opposition arms embargo, effectively opening the way for individual EU states to help arm the Syrian rebels, was undoubtedly the right choice even though Malta itself does not intend sending any arms to Syria.

But the difference between Malta and its fellow EUI member states is that Malta’s neutrality is enshrined in its Constitution and as such Malta’s agreement to allow those EU state wishing to do so is all the more positive.

It was also an instance which clearly demonstrates how far Malta has moved away from its previous isolationist policies and embedded neutrality, and how this must eventually be reflected in an update to the Constitution in the upcoming Constitutional Convention.

The Libyan conflict had shown that there is no place left in this world for strict neutrality and that in such situations a country cannot afford to sit on the fence – in such situations a country must decide to stand up and be counted as being on the right side of history.  In the Libyan situation Malta had done just that many times over, and it is positive to see that this new government is not so entrenched in past dogma that it sticks steadfastly to the country’s Cold War concept of neutrality.

Overall, the EU’s unanimous decision to lift the ban on arming certain Syrian opposition groups for those countries that want to provide arms to help the opposition fend off the Assad regime’s relentless attacks, namely the UK and France, was undoubtedly the right decision. 

The lifting of the embargo comes with the proviso that the arms in question will only be used only for the protection of civilians affected by the conflict.  The EU’s foreign ministers left all other sanctions against the Assad regime in place and, in fact, extended them to a 12-month period.

The international community has delayed for far too long now, far too much blood has been spilt in Syria, and it is encouraging that the EU is now leading the way in this respect.

Of course diplomacy is always the best means of finding a solution and much of the world along with Malta, according to Foreign Minister George Vella, is hoping that upcoming international peace talks in Geneva with representatives of Assad's regime aimed at finding a resolution to the deadly conflict will bear fruit.

For its part, the Assad regime has said it would attend the US-Russian sponsored talks.  Those talks are at the moment the international community’s only plan on the table for bringing an end to the bloody conflict that has killed more than 70,000 people, many of which have been civilians, over the last two years.

As European Commission President José Manuel Barroso observed this week, the humanitarian picture inside Syria is grave and it has become the biggest humanitarian crisis of the last decade. 

Inside Syria at least 6.8 million people are right now in dire need of assistance. The number of internally displaced people now stands at over four million and the number of refugees to neighbouring countries is steadily increasing.

But the US and many of its European allies have been reluctant to send sophisticated weapons to Syrian rebels, fearing they could end up in the hands of radical Islamic groups such as the al-Qaida-affiliated Jabhat al-Nusra that have emerged as the most effective and organised fighting force on the opposition's side.

In the meantime, the Syrian opposition yesterday called on EU member states to urgently supply it with better weapons to help it overthrow the regime, which is not exactly what the lifting of the arms embargo foresees.

In a statement on Tuesday, the Syrian opposition coalition urged the EU to send “specialised weaponry to repel the fierce attacks waged against unarmed civilians” by the Assad regime, its allies in Lebanon's militant Hezbollah group and their alleged Iranian backers.

“The Coalition recognises that this decision is part of many serious efforts by the EU to support the Syrian people throughout the hardships in the uprisings,” the opposition group said. “However, despite the importance of this decision, the words must be solidified by action.”

There are deep divisions in the EU over the ways and means to end the bloodshed in Syria, and even Britain and France have said they have no immediate plans to send weapons until diplomacy has first been given a chance.

Russia, a close ally of the Assad regime, has harshly criticised the EU’s decision to allow the arming of Syrian rebels, saying that it undercuts international efforts to negotiate an end to the civil war. Moscow also renewed its pledge to supply Assad's regime with advanced missiles, which could transform an already brutal conflict into an East-West proxy fight. 

Israel has even signalled it was prepared to strike Russian deliveries of air defence missiles systems to Syria, portraying the prospect as a national threat.

From the outset, the stakes have been incredibly high, but they will become higher still with respect to several other authoritarian regimes should the EU and its international partners not take more of this week’s kind of decisive action to bring the bloodshed and atrocities being committed to a halt.