Home | Discussion | News | Articles | Submit Articles | Cartoons | Shop .

Search Articles
Advanced Search
CATEGORIES
COLUMN
FEATURE
ANALYSIS
EDITORIAL
CONTINENT
AFRICA
AMERICA
ASIA-PACIFIC
EUROPE
MIDDLE-EAST
SOUTH-ASIA
Publish Date
Month:

Year:

 

 

Iviews > Articles > The Syrian Conundrum and the American Response
 Articles

1


 

Can we be sure about the short and long run outcomes? Do we know the agenda of all the players pushing for coercive action? Given that the UK and Germany have distanced themselves, is it really our job to do?

The Syrian Conundrum and the American Response
9/11/2013 - Political - Article Ref: IV1309-5520
Number of comments:
Opinion Summary: Agree:  Disagree:  Neutral:
By: Dr. Shafi A. Khaled
Iviews* -


At the outset, Syrian government's actions are indefensible.

That said, settling the score in Syria on behalf of the scores of innocent victims of gas attack by their own government seems appealing, reasonable and warranted.

But is it that cut and dried? Can we be sure about the short and long run outcomes? Do we know the agenda of all the players pushing for coercive action? Given that the UK and Germany have distanced themselves, is it really our job to do?

First, face saving our typically calm and thoughtful President cannot be any reason for a military retaliation.

Secondly, after going through two wars almost a decade and half long and with a constant drone presence over the enemy territory, how can stepping back send wrong signal to our enemies suggesting weakness?

Thirdly, that by seeking approval of the Congress makes the President appear less presidential is an utter absurdity on the part of Representative Peter King.

Fourthly, having entirely sidestepped the brutal military coup in Egypt against its first ever elected government, any intervention in Syria carries dual messages: One, that of hypocrisy and two, that of a desperate bid to restore image as the Champion of Democracy.

Fifthly, by one German account, there was a command and control failure causing this abomination. Renegade officers pulled the trigger despite the Syrian Administration's refusal to grant permission to do so.

Sixth, following an earlier gas attack, a similar outpouring of outrage and saber rattling was directed at Syria. It was later disproved. This time around we are getting too close to the real thing, so we need evidence. We cannot wait for another Wikileak or NSA leak to find out what really happened.

Seventh, NJ's Senator Bob Menendez is the mover of this resolution. It's not clear who his Pied Piper is. He has been a rabid, wanton anti-Iranian, being either the architect or the pusher of every new sanction-laden bill against that country. So, it is not clear whether this is a ploy to bring Iran to task by punishing its sole regional ally. Despite being a Democrat, his goal seems to be to corner his Party's President to go into war with Iran by delegitimizing all other options.

Eight, will this attack win the war for the rebels? Hardly!


Ninth, does that mean the attack has to be massive, widespread and sustained? It appears to be the case. The military has gone through multiple iterations of its mission and it is now supposed to last for 60 days and cover the length and breadth of the country! Whoa!! So, now, Syria's Civil War, in all likelihood, will become our war and soon we will be expected to own all of the fallout because we added to the mess and multiplied it many folds. Thus, in a few years should a US Ambassador be killed in Latakia, Aleppo or Damascus, we should not have to search to place the blame.

Tenth, what will such an air campaign likely do to Syria? It will be rendered a hollow shell, made amorphous bereft of tangible governmental structures and made porous to all forms of uncivil elements. The transition will not have been organic. It will become like the unmanageable Benghazi or the imploding democracies of Iraq and Afghanistan for which our patriotic soldiers sacrificed so dearly and to which the embedded media gave a pass.

Eleventh, with massive and complete intervention, the outcome may parallel that in South East Asia in the late 1960s when Laos and Cambodia were bombed to tatters. Thus, Prince Norodom Sihanouk's stable, organic government lost its hold over Cambodia. Soon Pol Pot followed and the Killing Fields ensued. The minority-majority divide is starker in Syria than it was in Rwanda. So, should the Syrian regime collapse wholesale without any recourse to negotiation, terrible retribution will most likely follow. A longer war though painful is likely to produce better government. The cases in point are Vietnam and Bangladesh: 30 years vs. 9 months of struggle. Victory is not an end in of itself!

Finally, even if Syria surrenders her WMD at the behest of Russia, and the US Government, on its part, responds to the call to cease and desist, that probably will not be the case with the evil, immoral, cruel Stalinist Syrian regime. Regardless, the thinking and the attitude that led the US to the umpteenth brink of flexing its muscle is also not about to change any time soon. According to some analysts, it is a product of hubris and opportunism toward extending its global sphere of influence as well as a mindset driven by the desire for oil wealth.

*****

Dr. Shafi A. Khaled is a freelance writer. He teaches and does research in Business & Economics.

RSS Feed - ITunes Podcast

The opinions expressed herein, through this article or comments, contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of iViews. These are offered as a means for iViews to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization.

The iViews site may occasionally contain copyrighted material the use of which may not always have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. iViews is making such material available in its effort to advance understanding of humanitarian, education, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, and such (and all) material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use any copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Search in this page for:

Print this article
Email to a friend
Post comments
RSS Feed
ITunes Podcast

 

 

 
About Us | Contact Us | Submit Articles
Copyright 1999-2014 by iViews.com. All Rights Reserved
Powered by IslamiCity