I haven't brought up Syria before because I am not well versed
in the details, and frankly it's just depressing. But some recent turn
of events have made things even more complicated and impactful.
- Israel has bombed a supposed weapons shipment to
Hezbollah near the border. They may have also bombed a weapons facility
in Damascus last month. We are used to thinking that Jihadi groups are
also anti-government because most dictators in the Muslim World are kind
of secular. But in Hezbollah's case ("The Party of God" formed to
oppose the first Israeli invasion of Lebanon), they are explicit allies
of Iran (a Shia theocracy and Shia majority nation) and Syria (neither
of those). But Hezbollah is Shia and they support Assad against the
rebels who are majority Sunni. So things are taking a nasty sectarian
turn.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/05/world/meast/syria-violence/
-
The regime or the rebels may have used chemical weapons in combat,
which would violate the "red line" established by Obama as a trigger for
escalation. But it's doubtful. However, America's #1 concern there is
probably the containment of those WMDs. Even if Assad is toppled, who
will control and distribute his stockpile?
-
We know that Iran and Russia (and China sort-of) support Assad's regime
because they are strategic/trade allies, and Assad as seen as a counter
to Israel and US "domination" of the region. So they have blocked
stronger EU-led actions against Assad in the UN, and continue to ship
high tech weapons to Damascus in spite of global condemnation.
- The EU embargo on weapons trade with Syria just expired, so
the UK and France are considering arming the rebels (but which rebels is
a big question). The UN has opposed this, and the US doesn't want to go
down that route for obvious reasons, but has likely provided advisers
and non-lethal resources to some rebels. We are trying to prop up
non-Jihadi, pro-Western rebels, because unfortunately some of the most
powerful and effective rebel groups like Jabhat al-Nusra are Sunni
extremists who have recently allied themselves with Al Qaeda (and
therefore got on the global terror list and cut off from Western aid).
So clearly we don't want to arm them and help them win, but we also want
Assad to fall. Of course rebel groups are fighting each other too, as
we saw in Libya. The West is caught in a terrible spot: Assad is a jerk
and supported by orgs and nations we don't get along with. He is
slaughtering his people, but he is also keeping Al Qaeda and the Muslim
Brotherhood out of power there. It's like Egypt but compounded by WMD
containment fears.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/10/opinion/bergen-al-qaeda-syria/
-
As if that wasn't bad enough, the top link from Yahoo describes how
Hezbollah is now actively sending in fighters to Syria to defend Assad, a
noteworthy escalation (Muslim fighters flocking to Syria, like Afghanistan and Iraq before). This may help Assad cling to power but turn the
populace against Islamic groups, though most of them have already picked
sides. The Shia Alawites are the ruling minority; wealthier, urban, and
aligned with Assad. So Iran, some of Iraq, and Hezbollah obviously
support that side, and Saudi, Israel, and Al Qaeda oppose them
(interesting "allies" indeed). Al Qaeda leaders have also urged other Muslims to go to Syria and topple Assad. The poorer, oppressed majority are
Sunnis, who want Assad out either because they are pro-reform or hate
Shia/Alawites or follow Salafi-Jihadi fundamentalist Sunni Islam like Al
Qaeda. As we've seen in Iraq, both sides may think of the other as
heretics, and both have a history of ethnic cleansing (BTW the Syria
conflict is also inflaming sectarian tension in fragile Iraq now too).
So Assad and the Shia see this as an existential struggle, because they
fear that if the Sunnis take over, they will be slaughtered.
- So who should the West back and arm? It's a confusing mess.
Some have said we should intervene on a humanitarian basis and protect
civilians. Enforce a no-fly zone maybe. A few problems with that (that
completely escape folks like McCain): Syria's air defenses are much
better than Libya's or Serbia's. Syria has WMDs and delivery systems for
them, unlike Libya or Serbia. Syria is next door to our allies in Iraq
and Israel, unlike Libya or Serbia. You get the picture. I am not sure
what the "right thing to do" is, but if we intervene militarily, it's
going to be ugly with a lot of consequences. What I also fear is an
escalating multi-nation sectarian war. We know that various groups are
financially and militarily backing or opposing the various Syrian
forces. And those backers don't like each other: Iran, Saudi, Israel,
the EU, Russia, China, US, and NGOs connected to Jihadi terrorism. This
proxy war may eventually evolve into an overt war. And if that happens,
Iraq will look tame in comparison.
No comments:
Post a Comment