The Syrian conflict—an offshoot of the
famous January 2011 Arab Spring which shook regimes in the Arab world has
featured deadly twists and turns since it was caught in the winds of the Arab spring since March 2011.
Starting with mild solidarity protests
in favour of the Arab Spring in other Arab nations, the protests
metamorphosized into anti-government protests in major Syrian cities. Undecided
on how to respond to the protesters, the Syrian government responded with counter
protest actions by pro-government supporters and later quelling anti-government
protest with outright use of force! The Syrian government forces began firing
live rounds into anti-government protest groups! And that became the last straw
that broke the camel’s back. The Syrian senario became that of an irreversible
conflict senario. Defecting government troops and others ready to take up arms against the government
formed the Free Syrian Army. The opposition made some political arrangements
and at a point, it was recognized by the Western powers and most Arab countries as the
legitimate government of Syria--- but do they really control the fighting wing,
let alone the contiguous swathes of territory?
From pockets of skirmishes and uprisings,
the Syrian conflict has grown to a full blown conflict or sectarian civil war
leaving much of Syria in ruins. Over the last few months, Aleppo, Homs, Idlib,
Hama, Idlib, et al, have
had parts or almost all of their environs in ruins.
A devastated
Khalidiya district in Homs
With
the Syrian conflict taking a sectarian pattern featuring the majority Sunni
Population against the minority ruling Alawi
and the foreign implications to the conflict, it’s difficult to see an amicable
end at sight.
An aerial view of the Khalidiya district of Homs (the Home of the Syrian revolution)
Much
to the displeasure and disgust of the majority Sunni Arab neighbours, the
Syrian government has received technical and manpower support from Iran and its
proxy militia-Hezbollah. At the level of the United Nations, China and
especially Russia have shown unwavering support for the Syrian regime of Bashir
Al-Assad.
Whilst
the Syrian conflict started amid the controversies that engulfed the Western
involvement in Libya, the United States, Britain and France were very cautious
in militarily supporting the opposition cause; inferring that military support
from them will happen only when the Syrian government is seen to have used
Chemical weapons against it people.
At
the onset of the conflict with fatality figures still in its hundreds, it was
thought that it would only be a matter of time before the Assad regime tows the
line of Egypt’s Mubarak and Tunisia’s Ben Ali especially with defections of
some high ranking government and military officials. Intriguingly, the
government has withstood all odds and it appears there will be no letting down
in the face of the armed opposition. In fact, it has blamed the armed uprising
against it as the work of ‘foreign armed
gangs’ and terrorists!. While this statement may be disputable at the onset
of the conflict, it’s hard to decipher the allegiances of the armed Syrian
opposition. Initially starting out as renegade soldiers and men with munitions;
the armed Syrian opposition now comprises of foreign fighters prominent among
them-Jihadist from the Al-Nusra front
which does have links to Al Queda.
At
the early stages of the Syrian conflict, with the Assad regime not buckling
with rising armed insurrection, a strategic and tactical arming of the Syrian
opposition would have most likely turned the tide. As the conflict wore on to a
stalemate, a strategic boost in weaponry and manpower support from Iran and Hezbollah
and then influx of Shiite fighters from the Iraqi insurgency has boosted
government morale as seen in the takeover of the strategic town of Quasir. This
victory for the government troops have spurred up action for military action
against other rebel held towns/cities prominent among which is Aleppo and Homs.
On
the side of the armed opposition it remains unclear if there’s any unity with
the political opposition which seem in disarray especially with the resignation
of top shots. Boosted by Sunni militias and Jihadist fighters of Al-Queda
leanings from around the middle-east and even world wide, it remains unclear
who will receive armed support from western backers if it does eventually comes
Although
heavily funded by Sunni Arab led governments top of which is Saudi Arabia and
Qatar, the Opposition still needs strategic armaments especially significant
air support if they will score a military victory against Assad’s forces
On
the part of the Western powers that have already recognized the Syrian
opposition as the legitimate representative of the Syrian people, they have had
to reconsider their support in the face of the much detested Alqueda fighting
mercenaries spurring up the armed opposition. The question they have to answer
is who will they arm?
On
the part of the government of Assad, they might claim some vindication now in
their reference to the armed Syrian opposition as ‘armed gangs and terrorists’
from the onset of the conflict. And one thing remains clear! In the light of numerous
fighting groups making up the Syrian opposition, if they do score military
victory at last, the Syrian scenario won’t be different from what obtains in
Iraq and Libya. Surely, it will be another recipe for the sectarian disintegration of Syria. On the other hand, after much
detest against the Assad regime with so much blood spilled, would it be time
for the Western Sunni powers to concede to Assad? After all, his government has stood firm and can
only apparently reunite the country’s minority and majority groups sparing
sectarian division..
Whilst
the Western powers are trying to identify who to arm amongst the Syrian armed
opposition, and the Russians, Iranians and Chinese staunchly unwavering in
their support for Assad; wouldn’t it be time to consider the outcome of any
endgame to the conflict?
Does
the world need another addition to perennial disintegrated sectarian states
especially in the Middle East awash with weapons? Or a peaceful state.. Whether
autocratic or democratic provided there’s no bloodshed on a massive scale?
The
answer to this begs the question. Let all players to the conflict ponder on
their conscience!
No comments:
Post a Comment