The president of the United States of America is in a particularly unenviable position, facing a controversial decision on the global scale, that either way will result in a great deal of censure, and criticism, whichever choice he and his government makes.
The situation in Syria is dire – there’s no doubt of that. As catchy and optimistic as the phrase “Arab Spring” sounds, it belies the brutality and horror of a civil war that has accompanied it, racking the county for a little over two years, so far.
And now, the United States, a country with one of the most powerful militaries in the world has come to a tricky impasse. Facing patchy, but damning evidence, they have to decide whether or not the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons is reason enough to involve themselves in the country’s civil war – a war that has nothing, really, to do with them.
Let’s face it – they’re damned if they do, and damned if they don’t. If President Obama, Secretary Kerry, and the rest of the US Government cooperate and give into the popular pressure against another war in the Middle East, Syrian President Bashar Al Assad will continue to trample human rights.
I should also add at this point that Al Assad and his government don’t exactly have a clean record for respecting human rights. They have many awful accomplishments under their belts, including outlawing all political opposition parties, and routinely, arbitrarily arresting, torturing, and killing anyone who dissents.
With growing evidence that Al Assad’s regime has used chemical weapons against the rebel forces, and the stubborn unwillingness for compromise or a peaceable solution from either side, it’s a given that civil war will continue to go on for a long time if something doesn’t happen soon.
And let’s not forget the whole displacement issue either. In a completely rational response to their home country getting torn apart by civil war, over two million Syrians have fled into neighboring countries. Dangerous, ill-provisioned, impoverished tent-camps, some the size of small cities, have gone up in those countries. The way things are going, there’s little indication their growth will slow down.
But what happens if the US does go through with their military intervention? They’ll stir up the hornets’ nest. Almost every member of the United Nations has cautioned against military intervention, at least right away.
Russia and Iran have steadfastly condemned intervention. Even if the US gets the green light from its own congress and the UN Security Council, its military action will come as a serious offense to both nations and sour the already awful diplomacy that’s going on between these groups.
It will also be another costly excursion for the US military into another Middle Eastern Country.
And let’s say the strikes are successful for a second. In the event that the US successfully destroys enough military fixtures and chemical weapons stores, and turns the tides against Al Assad and his allies, what then?
I hate to sound so pessimistic, but I see it being similar to what happened in Egypt. The only thing the rebel forces in Syria have in common right now is that they all want Al Assad out of power. They are literally a patchwork of groups with different cultural and religious beliefs and identities.
And if I’ve learned anything at all from reading about the last few hundred years of wars in the middle east, it’s that the basis of all those wars have usually been just those things – cultural and religious beliefs.
