Freedom was their cry and freedom is what they demanded. Nation
upon nation saw regimes fall across the Arab world as dynastic dictators left
following a surging rally for democracy. Sweeping across North Africa and the
Middle East, tyrants fell both peacefully and bloodily. Hosni Mubarak’s
thirty-year reign fell following a long stand-off with young and old Egyptians,
whilst Colonel Gadaffi’s 42-year-old rule ended bloodily after an intervention
by NATO in Libya’s short, yet bitter civil war. The tide of democracy appeared
to emerging across nations that for so long had suffered hardship and poverty.
Young and educated Arabs wanted to be part of fledgling democracies with real
futures. Not trapped in nations where human rights, basic amenities and jobs
are hard to come by. Surely the next to fall would be the House of Assad?
Two years have passed since the Syrian uprising began and
what has fast developed into the region’s bloodiest civil war. The death toll
is estimated to be around 70,000. More than half a million refugees have
escaped into neighbouring Jordan. More worryingly, following the alleged use of
chemical weapons by the Syrian regime, President Assad appears to show no
intent in relenting. The West appears hapless in deciding whether intervention
would not only work, but whether it is desirable.
The problem for the West remains political, moral and
straightforward realism. Politically, the inability for likely intervening
nations like the US and UK have been blocked in the UN by Syria’s long term
allies China and most notably Russia. The Chinese feel uncomfortable condoning
any external upheaval when they have their own dissidents within Tibet and
Xinjiang province, any support may simply lead to calls for greater autonomy
within its own borders. Russia, on the other hand, has felt the full force of
international criticism and indignation of supporting a murderous regime. Yet
for Russia, it is far more complicated. Not only, like China, have they had
difficulties with its own ethnic groups, most noticeably in the Caucuses, but
more fundamentally, Syria has been one of the staunchest and longest serving allies
in the region. As a client of Russian military hardware, as well as providing a
Mediterranean port for the Russian fleet, why would President Putin feel
obliged to cave into Western demands when it would seriously lose out?
![]() |
The city of Homs. |
Morally, the problem remains more painful. When I last wrote
about Syria, the estimation of deaths was around 25,000 mark. Humanitarian
reports remain bleak. Women and children are destitute. President Assad remains
intent on powering through what he believes to be external forces intruding in
Syria’s internal affairs. Two years into the war and it now appears that Assad
is not looking for an escape route. If half a million or more die, it is cost
he is willing to face. There the problem lies for the West. Within eight
months, the death toll has almost quadrupled. It has already dithered since the
fighting began and now it finds itself with a growing casualty list and a more
radical Islamic opponent. With evidence of chemical weapons now emerging – the so-called
red line before intervention, ordinary Syrians killed in the crossfire and the possibility
of a less amenable successor to Bashar Al-Assad. They have seen that post-Gadaffi;
Libya is dealing with external enemies both within and outside its borders in
Mali and Algeria, most notably Al-Qaeda. An intervention in Syria may simply lead
to a full-scale war across the whole Middle East.
Finally, the straightforward realism is thus: if the rebels
cannot be trusted and America has no real appetite to intervene then what is
likely to happen to Syria? The two most important questions are whether Russia
is willing to commit its support both diplomatically and militarily. If an
intervention appears unlikely then, Vladimir Putin will simply continue with
its support. Secondly, how far is Israel willing to sit on the sidelines? Only
this weekend there were reports of attacks by the Israeli Defence Force within
Syria following suggestions that Hezbollah had obtained chemical weapons. With
the conflict on its doorstep and Al Qaeda operating freely within some of its
towns and cities, it is hard to foresee the Israeli military standing down.
![]() |
Bashar al-Assad: Defiant |
Politicians and diplomats are fully aware of the risks of
non-intervention. The memory of Srebrenica and Rwanda remain particularly vivid
within the UN and NATO. Yet, perhaps the time has passed for intervention. The
Arab Spring is dead. As it stands, who knows what will happen.