Whether Syria is going to degenerate into a civil war if the
insurgents are armed has long been an issue of debate. Some have questioned the
authenticity of the rebels in Syria; and, doubted the commitment of Bashar
al-Assad’s government to the United Nation’s brokered peace right from day one.
A few Middle-Eastern experts have restated there is hardly going to be change
in Syria unless that spoken about civil war comes or there is military
intervention from the outside world. In
the interim, many welcome the kicking out of Bashar al-Assad’s ambassadors from
their state capitols by nearly all EU countries, Canada and the United States. What
do you do about a leader who has chosen to kill rather than protect his citizens? The newsreel painted a very grim report of the incidents in Syria;
and, it does not look very pretty.
The United Nation’s attempted a brokered agreement to
speedily ease Bashar al-Assad out of power; however, Kofi Annan’s effort was
shredded this weekend as reportedly put: Bashar al-Assad’s government went on a
murder and infanticide spree! History will once again document that there are
leaders and there are murderous leaders, who will do anything to remain in
power. None of the reforms sought by Kofi Annan is going to materialize
considering the intentions of Damascus towards the brokered peace. Not a single
reform recommended by the former United Nation's Chief was greeted with open arms.
To a large extent, Bashar al-Assad saw United Nations as an intruder into the national
affairs of Syria; and perceived the west, as controverted nuisance in the ongoing
rife in his nation. The need to isolate Syria and her brutal government are
inevitable; however, will this solve the problem? Bashar al-Assad government has
adapted to the killing of innocent Syrians, age notwithstanding. Bashar
al-Assad and his government believe they are in the process of purging all the
oppositions; and, will be able to pacify the remainder, if they are able to buy
some time. Would the world tolerate that? Would the world continue to
stand by, seeing innocent souls wasted? Maybe these questions are best answered
by a recent comment from the Turkish Prime Minister, Tayyip Erdogan: “There is [ ]
a limit to patience, and I believe that, God willing, there is also a limit to
the patience in the U.N. Security Council."
So far, the killings have gone unabated. Saudi Arabia and
the Arab world are hardly going to bear arms to fight Bashar al-Assad, if the
great old United States does not engage. Washington DC however, has made it clear
it is not going to shed another American blood in the Middle East for now. The
nation and its people are tired of fighting; especially not in an election
year. Except there is a rewording of Democrat’s or Republican's platform at their
upcoming convention to accommodate the new reality around the globe, especially
in Syria, I can suspiciously tell you, America is not going to fight another
war very soon. Our national interest is hardly at stake and credit for another unworthy war is far remote at this time.
The popularity and relevance of America’s might to global
stability and peace, are as clear as day and night. Prior intervention of
America in some wars, which are now considered as misinformed, is a pointer,
why America has chosen to be lukewarm in light of what happened in Syria over
the weekend; however, not before kicking the butt of Syria’s Ambassador out of Washington
DC. The struggle in the Middle East will continue, both within Syria and around
Syria. Unless our national interest is at stake, something like finding our staunchest ally, Israel, in trouble due to events in Syria and or Iran, it is very
unlikely that we will get into war in Syria. For now, it is very likely that the negotiated peace by former Secretary Kofi Annan, is all to fall back upon unless the United
Nations decrees otherwise; and, call out for military intervention to save
ordinary people, who have suffered disproportionately from the Syrian
government clamp down.
Now, on the other side show in the Middle East, with respect
to the nuclear ambition Iran, it is safe to assume that Iran will continue to
build its nuclear weapon and Israel will continue to emphasis a nuclear Iran is
unacceptable for reason of safety. But for campaign bravado, no one sees an
election of a “President Romney” with a bold plan to reassert America’s powers
in Syria, even though he continues to muddle up foreign policy question,
asserting that a cold war still exists with Russia. President Obama on the other hand seems a dove, considering the depth of his apprehension into hurried intervention in wars that do not affect America's interest directly. America is attempting to De-Americanize the remaining time we have in Afghanistan and I don’t perceive that
changing, no matter who ends up winning the White House in November, 2012. For all intense and purpose, what is unknown
now is, if the troubles in Syria escalates to the point of no return , will
America intervene and end up fighting a
war that may end up benefiting Hezbollah. We are now in uncharted waters and if you ask
me, I’ll say: Your guess is as good as mine!
