Regional Developments In The Battle For Syria

In an unfolding tragic tale of twists and turns, the Syrian conflict has transmuted from that of a solidarity show of support for the Arab Spring in 2011 to that of a continuous conflagrative self destruction perpetrated by a cesspool of several armed opposition factions majorly under the umbrella of the Free Syrian Army (FSA), several Jihadi groups notable among which are the Al Nusra Front and the Islamic State (IS); all of which though disunited on the battle front, are fighting a common cause of overthrowing the government of Bashar al-Assad.

Since 2011, when the conflict started, it was insinuated that the Syrian regime will fall, like that of Tunisia and Egypt within a couple of months. As protests against the government simmered, it was met with brute response from the security forces and that gave birth to the armed opposition mostly made up disaffected government soldiers under the umbrella of the Free Syrian Army (FSA). With a resolute government not ready to stand down, the scenario turned from that of protest scenes to a full scale conflict.

As world powers (US, UK, France, China and Russia) bickered on resolutions and counter resolutions to resolve the ensuing conflict, their actions and inaction buoyed by an unstable neighbouring Iraq facing a Jihadi insurgency turned the tide of the conflict to that of an unfolding grotesque. Jihadi fighters under the platform of the Islamic State or ISIS and the Al-Nusra front with a vision of creating an Islamic Caliphate in the entire Middle East launched cross border incursions into Syria. For the Jihadists they had two enemies; the Syrian government and the armed opposition forces. On the long run, the Islamic State (IS) gained much ground and declared a caliphate on conquered territories covering Iraq and Syria.

Haunted by the ripples of past military campaigns in the Middle East notably Iraq, the US and the Western powers though yearning for the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad dithered in active military support for the Syrian Opposition and with the Syrian regime finding active support from Russia, there was no blithe to the aggression of the opposition. As such, the Syrian conflict was left to run its brutal self destructive cause with the hope that the struggle would be resolved on the battle field.

The rise of the Islamic State kitted with sophisticated weaponry captured from the US kitted Iraqi army has changed the face of the conflict. With the capture of large swathes of territory across Iraq and Syria by this group, they seem poised to give a knockout blow to what is left of the regimes in Iraq and Syria and then expanding their conquest beyond. Faced with this threat and brutal executions of hostages by the Islamic state, the US together with a coalition of Western and Arab Countries have begun to take military action, launching airstrikes against IS targets. However, airstrikes alone will not wipe of the capabilities of the Islamic State and whilst the US do have a working relationship with the Iraqi government, the same cannot be said with the Syrian government.

Mapping the Syrian conflict
Source: bbcnews.com

Peace moves has seemed elusive and those arranged in Geneva (Geneva 1 and Geneva 2) between the Syrian opposition and the government ended inconclusively, voiding the wisdom of top diplomats in Koffi Annan and Lakhdar Brahimi.

Lessons learnt from the intrigues of the Arab Spring especially in Libya and the Iraqi story after the US invasion of 2003 has proved that overthrowing strong regimes to the mercies of an uncoordinated opposition doesn’t favour the stability of the State either on the short or long run; therefore, it might be tragic to note that at this stage of the conflict, the US is still trying to identify ‘the moderate armed opposition’ to kit with arms in the fight against the Islamic State.

The Syrian conflict at this stage will be best resolved by the use of force against the Islamic State and other extremist groups and political negotiation between the opposition and government. Seeing that the Syrian Opposition does not have control over the activities of the armed opposition (Free Syrian army) and that the armed Opposition in itself do have a concrete command structure, the sustenance of the regime of Bashar al-Assad becomes expedient for the survival and continuity of the Syrian state.

The Syrian people have suffered untold casualties destruction of their homeland and this has had a spiral effect on neighbouring countries. As such, the conflict should be resolved by pragmatic means at this stage forgiving past misdeeds.

THE BURKINABE REVOLUTION: EXPOSING AN INEFFECTUAL AFRICAN UNION

When thousands of Burkinabes stormed the streets of Ouagadougou in a massive protest which saw the Country’s Parliament building go up in flames and ultimately terminating the twenty seven year Presidency of Blaise Campaore in the fall October 2014, the World and indeed Sub-Saharan Africa was thrown aghast with thoughts of another impending revolution.

Burkinabes protesting in October 2014 against the quest of Blaise Campore to seek an additional term in office
Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-29948773

For not too long ago, the Arab Spring which emanated from North Africa reverberated the entire Arab Middle East and ensured the downfall of three of Africa’s longest serving leaders in Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi (42yrs), Tunisia’s Zine Al-Abidine Ben Ali (24yrs) and Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak (30yrs); with the downfall of another of Africa’s longest serving Ruler in Burkina Faso, there were fears that this could trigger an ‘Africa Hamarttan’ across Sub-Saharan Africa.

In an apparent bid to stabilize the Burkinabe situation, the Presidents of Nigeria, Senegal and Ghana under the aegis of ECOWAS and The African Union flew in to Ouagadougou to meet with the Military who had already filled the power vacuum, urging them to form a transitional government and hand over power to a Civilian head within two weeks or face sanctions. In a riposte to this demand, the Burkinabe Military leader Lt Col Isaac Zida blurted that;

"We are not afraid of sanctions; we care much more about stability,"

"We have waited on the African Union in moments when it should have shown its fraternity and its friendship but instead was not there,"

"It's unfortunate but it's not too late."

Burkina Faso's new Military Ruler Lt Col Isaac Zida welcoming Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan to Ouagadougou for an AU/ECOWAS initiated transition talk
Source: http://encomium.ng/president-goodluck-jonathan-arrives-ouagadougou-bukina-faso-to-help-facilitate-the-rapid-resolution-of-the-current-political-crisis-in-bukina-faso-on-wednesday/

The African Union and its constituent regional bodies have always taken an ominous stand when confronted issues of Military Coup d’états in African Countries, and seemly take a sanctimonious stand in threatening and imposing sanctions. However, it must be noted that the Africa Union was powerless during the Arab spring and could not save its founder and self proclaimed King of kings of Africa--- Muammar Gaddafi.

Originally founded from the fusion of regional blocs and Pan-Africanist ideas of founding fathers in Ghana’s Kwame Nkrumah, Senegal’s Leopold Senghor, Nigeria’s Nnamdi Azikwe, Kenya’s Jomo Kenyatta, Ethiopia’s Haile Sellasie, and Zambia’s Kenneth Kaunda the Organization of African Unity (OAU) sought to liberate the Africa from colonial rule. After an initial successful manifesto, the OAU lost steam and relevance as the founding fathers where all embroiled in instituting one party states and stifling opposition groups in their domains. Governance in independent Africa was served at mediocre level and not the excuse of leadership naivety could sustain the seeming tyrannical rule of the Pan- African fathers in their respective countries.

One by one, they were all butted out of power by the barrel of the gun amid ensuing economic and social chaos which subjected most African countries to Military dictatorships and internecine civil wars starting from the late 1960’s. In all these, the OAU maintained a figurative ceremonial existence even as its regional power houses had no moral right to set sanctimonious standards-- Ethiopia was under the a Military dictatorship of the ‘Derg’ and grappling with a civil war, Nigeria was under Military dictatorship and under sanctions from  Euro-American supranational Organizations, and other countries not under military rule were apparently under civilian styled tyrannical one party states; Kenya, Cote d’Ivoire, Zambia, Malawi being perfect examples.

On the advent of the new Millennium in the 21^st Century, the OAU rebranded into the African Union (AU) following after the European model of the EU (European Union); among all its quest was that of good governance and this was instituted by the MDGs (Millennium Development Goals) and NEPAD (New Partnership for Africa’s Development). This assured that with the institution of multi party democracy in most Countries in Sub-Saharan  Africa, an improved development partnership with other global supranational organizations will ensue. Buoyed by the tact willingness of South Africa’s Thabo Mbeki, Nigeria’s Olusegun Obasanjo, Senegal’s Abdoulaye Wade, Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak and Algeria’s AbdulAzeez Bouteflika, the AU set sail on these notion and promises.

However, this noble quest was called to question by unrest in Cote d’ Ivoire, Military take overs in Mali and Guniea. Whilst all these were resolved, there has still been an underlying inquest of the dedication to the sanctimonious demands of the AU in constituent Countries as some long serving African rulers seek to consolidate their grip on power as seen in Robert Mugabe’s Zimbabwe (now serving 34yrs), Angola’s Jose Eduardo Dos Santos (now serving 35yrs), Equatorial Guniea’s Teodoro Obiang Nguema (now serving 35yrs), Cameroun’s Paul Biya (now serving 32yrs), and Uganda’s Yoweri Museveni (now serving 28yrs).

Regardless of the length of years in power, what is most important in leadership is the administration of fairness, equity, justice and good governance with concomitant development. After all, there are nations that do not have presidential/Prime Ministerial term limits like the United kingdom, Canada, Italy, Australia etc, but their citizens do have attendant freedom to decide their leaders.

Aside the question of length of stay in power, African regimes are still bothered with the question of administering development and good governance. This is the major cause for civil agitation Nigeria, Sudan, South Sudan, Eritrea etc and as such, rulers of these nations do not have a sanctimonious say on how other African countries should be governed.

From the experience of the Arab spring in Libya, revolutions do not come cheap and democratic governance might not ensure ‘unabated freedom’ as seen in Egypt aside the Tunisian exception which is a rare occurrence. As another of Africa’s long serving regime falls in Burkina Faso, it is insinuated that a political quake might be in the offing for other long serving regimes in Sub-Saharan Africa.

As usual, the AU, SADC, IGAD and ECOWAS will always come to the fray whenever such political fallouts occur, but as usual, their overtures might just be ignored until individual countries do the needful—administer leadership through justice, equity, fairness with concomitant good governance and development else it will be a proverbial kettle calling pot black.

‘And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? ⁴ Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? ⁵ Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye’.

Matt 7:3-5 (KJV)

THE ADVANCE OF ISIS: IMPLICATIONS OF A NEW REDLINE IN THE MIDDLE EAST

"Rush O Muslims to your state. Yes, it is your state. Rush, because Syria is not for the Syrians, and Iraq is not for the Iraqis,"……. Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi

On the first day of the Muslim fast which marks the commencement of the month of Ramadan corresponding to 1^st July 2014 or 1^st Ramadan 1435AH, the leader of the neo-caliphate enactment Islamic group also known as ISIS declared an Islamic State in the territories under the control of his group which straddles from Aleppo in Northern Syria to Diyala province in Iraq; effectively nullifying any existing border between Iraq and Syria whilst concomitantly invalidating any government control over these areas in both countries.

ISIS OPERATIONAL PRESENCE ACROSS IRAQ AND SYRIA

These actions were not neoteric, in fact, it had long been beginning to come and what was only left of that precipitate was the effect of that declaration and the harsh realities it meant for the peoples of the affected territories, neighbouring countries, the international diplomatic cosmos of World powers and other Nations of the Planet Earth.

The current civil and political instability in the Eastern Levant was precipitated by the US led invasion of Iraq in 2003, which toppled a stable Iraqi regime presided by Saddam Hussien, and the evasive consequence of the Arab spring which has perennially condemned Syria to a bitter warfare of attrition. Of all the Countries affected by the Arab Spring, the Syrian case remains most volatile and bloody; claiming fatalities of nearly 200,000 lives, displacing over 2000,000 civilians, and leaving heavy patches of ruins in all cities across the Syrian Urban and rural landscape.

What began as a protest for regime change snowballed into that of sectarian strife pitting the majority Syrian Sunni population against the minority Alawite led Syrian government. With Western powers wary of intervention, the Syrian scenario pitted a proxy warfare with sectarian regional powers sponsoring their military interests. The Syrian government found a ready ally in Iran (a regional Shiite power) and a readymade fighting man power in Hezbollah (a Lebanese based Shiite militant group). In response to the sectarian  dimension of the Syrian conflict, Sunni led militias such as Jabat al Nusra, ISIS (Islamic State in Syria and the Levant) and several others sprang up to fight the ‘infidel’ Alwaite or pro-Shia supported government. In no time, the Syrian conflict metamorphosed from a civil one to a religious one.

Across the Syrian Eastern border in Iraq, the government had been grappling for control of the country since the withdrawal of US and other allied forces. The ensuing unrest in Iraq assumed a sectarian cum religious dimension as the Kurds opted for autonomy whilst the  Sunnis and Shiites grappled for political power. The once repressed Shiites under Sunni Saddam Hussien gained political power being the majority (65% of Iraqis are Shia Muslims) amidst Sunni cries of marginalization. In between the Iraqi political discontent was a wave of pockets of insurgency by Islamic militias against what was seen as an American perpetrated government in Iraq. This insurgency was later mostly exclusively perpetrated by Sunni based militias against Shiite and government interests.

With regional and religious rivalry in the brew, Shiite militias and governments led by Shiites received military and support from Iran whilst Saudi Arabia and other gulf states actively funded Sunni Militias.

AN IMPLOSION OF THE ESTABLISHED ORDER.

With the Syrian situation attaining a stalemate, ISIS (a Sunni led Islamist Militia) seized Raqqa (a provincial capital in Northern Syria) and declared it a model for a proposed burgeoning Islamic State and claiming that they had the entire Middle East at sight for a Caliphate. Taking advantage of the security and political impunity in Iraq, ISIS fighters crossed over and disgraced an established multibillion dollar US funded Iraqi army; seizing Mosul, Tikrit, Anabar and Nineveh provinces in a lightening advance and threatening to match on Baghdad. For reasons best known to ISIS, it has slowed the pace of its advance whilst seeking to consolidate control on the swathes of territory under its control across Syria and Iraq.

IMPLICATIONS

The military exploits of ISIS has had a reverberating effect across the Middle East and even amongst Sunni led governments. The ISIS fighters are just a few kilometres away from the borders of Saudi Arabia and Jordan and providing a new impetus to crumble an already endangered Shiite led Syrian and Iraq government. For once, the quest of ISIS is now seen as a valid threat to an established order in the Middle East.

PERMUTATIONS

All through the wake of the Arab spring, the US and her allies have refrained from directly intervening militarily apart from Libya where air support was used to defeat the Gaddafi government. Rather, western intervention has been through cautious military advisory tactics and equipment (whether lethal or non lethal) to militant group they deem sympathetic.

Whilst tension and mistrust amongst Iran (a regional Shia power) and the rest of a Sunni dominant Arab Middle East remain high, both parties do not want to see a crumbling of established order in their respective domains.

A crumble of established order will add a renewed impetus for Kurdish independence a cause which will distort the boundaries of Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran—all of which are not ready to lose territory.

Continued heightened tensions will ensure the partition of Syria and Iraq along Sectarian lines, deflating existing borders and threaten the corporate borders of Jordan and Saudi Arabia all of which who have tribal affiliations across the borders.

A continued push by ISIS will threaten Jordan and Saudi Arabia and later on Iran and Turkey. Remotely, Israel and Lebanon will come into the fray and it will be hard for the US not to fight.

At this juncture, the bi-polar powers cannot afford to stand arms akimbo. And maybe this explains why Russia has provided Iraq with jets to bomb ISIS positions with a fore running support of Syrian attempt.

Permutations for an ISIS destablized Middle East
Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2655977/ISIS-militants-march-Baghdad-trademark-bullet-head-gets-way-control-north.html

In all, the latest trend in the Middle East precipitated by the action of ISIS may precipitate another gun power for a global conflict. Let’s hope Armageddon is not yet here!

"We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized...... "That would change my calculus. That would change my equation."... Barack Obama (20th August 2012)

THE ARAB SPRING: IMPLICATIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED

The public uprisings across the Middle East that greeted the dawn of the year 2011 came as a bewilderment to many. Ever since the middle ages, the Middle East-the home of the Arabs and the Spiritual home of the Islamic world has been ruled by several theocratic minded  governments and empires; in all, the reign of the Caliphs is still being referred to as the gloriest of all. The end of the First World War saw the demise of the Ottoman Empire and for the first time since the time of the Crusades, parts of the Arab world was ruled by Western Powers under the League of Nations Mandate. At first, the Arab world basked in the euphoria of freedom from Ottoman rule but later, Arab independence was sought.

Unlike the time of the Caliphs when the Arab world was under one government, this time the Arabs found themselves partitioned into several countries and at independence, Western powers (Great Britain and France) installed monarchical governments from the Hashemite clan to rule. Iraq had King Faisal 1, Jordan had King Abdullah, Egypt had King Fouad and Libya had King Farouk.

Apparently, these installed Monarchies were client regimes to the Allied powers and so a wave of Arab Nationalism arose shortly in the mid 20^th Century- The Baath party and Muslim brotherhood movement was born. The former party seized power through zealous Nationalist Military men and installed a wave of secular regimes across the Arab world.

These regimes were characteristically Sunni led except that of Syria and Iran which was Alawite and Shiite led. From the time of the Caliphs, the Arab world has been split along sectarian lines in terms of Islamic orthodoxy and this trend is a marked irreconcilable rift among the adherents to the Islamic faith; the Sunni and Shia sect being the most prominent among other miniature Islamic sects and subsects. At a time of Arab consciousness, the over 1000year rift once again came to prominence.

The Western powers preached democracy and were ready to take their crusade to heights in Africa especially at times of financial aid. However, when it came to the Middle

East, just like the USA’s power play in Central/Latin America in the 20th century, the West was basically interested installing client regimes-‘doesn’t matter whether democratic or autocratic’ provided the Jewish State was safe and their loyalty was ascertained.

For too long, several minority groups or indeed the Arab world in its entirety was held under repression. The Kurds, Berbers, Muslim Brotherhood, Sunni, Shiite, human rights et al; where held below freedom limits and thus a revolution was not farfetched! The USA and her allies despite fighting off Iraqi expansionist tendencies in the first gulf war and destroying significant Iraqi military machinery were involved in the first regime change in the Middle East all in the quest for ‘democracy among other motives’- the result, an unstable and ungovernable democratic Iraq!

Saddam Hussein's Statue at the centre of Baghdad being felled by Iraqi's after US troops entered the city in April 2003
Source: bbcnews.com

Like the fall of Saddam’s Statue in Baghdad, the Arab spring was greeted with cheers and thoughts of a prospective Utopia and Nationalistic bliss. Starting with the fall of the Tunisian regime of Ben Ali (who has always won previous elections by 98%) to Egypt’s Mubarak, the agony of the Arab Spring oozed with the military repressions in Libya, Yemen, Bahrain and Syria. Yet, the unimaginable fall of the regime of the King of Kings of Africa and Imam of Muslims in Gaddafi’s Libya through Western help gave the impetus for a prolonged Syrian uprising that has seen Bashir Al-Assad sit tight despite having over 100,000 killed and just a little less than 2million displaced internally and externally as refugees.

Hosni Mubarak and Muammar Gaddafi while they still held sway
Source:bbcnews.com

For Tunisia, it witnessed multiparty elections with a religious backed party forming the government; the apparatus of state being intact though expectations are still yet to be met.

The fall of Gaddafi did usher elections too, but with the apparatus of State in full collapse and the country awash with weapons, the Spring has brought nothing but an unsafe state truly governed by armed clans and gangs.

In Egypt, the Military did play a role in fall of the Mubarak regime and when elections finally came, the long repressed Muslim Brotherhood came to power. With expectations high, it’s been one protest after the other for and against government policies. Everybody now has a say and the exuberance was felt on the streets. The resultant- with just a year in power, the Muslim brotherhood led democratic government was brought down by protests albeit a Military coup.

Bodies of slain Egyptian protesters, most of them members of the Muslim Brotherhood
Source:bbcnews.com

The Egyptian Streets and squares have exhibited the democratic exuberance of all sides and parties in Egypt and for progress sake; the Military has stepped in a crackdown to clear the streets of protesters but not without a drop of blood!

The Egyptian Military clearing
Source:bbcnews.comthe Muslim Brother hood protesters in Cairo

It has been bloody in Yemen and Bahrain and Syria continues to shed more. What lessons do we have to learn?

      Revolutionary results as initially swift will not come easy and fast. Patience is the virtue.

      Religious parties have to redefine governance in a secular atmosphere, such that would accommodate minorities and respect the rights of everyone. Maybe Tunisia scored important points in this case.

      Care must be taken to ensure the preservance of the apparatus of state because revolution aftermaths are usually chaotic. Once again, thumbs up Tunisia!

      Revolutions should have a defined cause, devoid of significant external influence

 But the hardest lesson is that, by itself, people power is not enough. Translating popular protest and popular anger into real and lasting change is the real deal for any successful revolution.

Syria—What next for the revolution?

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!

AN IMPLODING SYRIA: IMPLICATIONS

AN IMPLODING SYRIA: IMPLICATIONS

‘In a guerrilla war the rebels only have not to lose to win; however, unless a regular army is clearly winning, it will lose.’-- Henry Kissinger (Former US Secretary of State).

When Syria caught up with the warmth of the Arab spring in March 2011, all thought it would be a matter of days/weeks as seen in Tunisia then calm will return back to the streets of Dimashq.

Instead, the Syrian scenario has defied all prescriptions of top UN diplomats in Kofi Annan who after several unsuccessful mediations had to resign. Then came Lakhdar Brahimi as the new UN envoy to Syria; but he had to admit the tough task ahead of him when he clearly spelt out that the Syrian crises was turning to a civil conflict.

Indeed, what started as a solidarity Arab spring protest in Deraa ended up being fatal on the 22^nd of April 2011, when 72 protesters were killed by security forces firing on protesters. Since then, mass killings have been a common show piece in all concerning Syria. From Jisr al-Shughour, Jabal al-Zawiya, Homs, Aleppo, Houla, Darayya to Baniyas et al; it’s been a common story of fatalities with the Syrian Government trading the blame on ‘armed gangs’ (Syrian rebel groups) as being responsible.

Whilst reports from Syria are most times independently unverifiable, it’s common consensus that the Syrian crises has reached a destructive peak as seen in the streams of refugees pouring into refugee camps in Jordan and Turkey. Estimated figures put the Syrian war causalities at 70,000 dead and over a million refugees. With the parties to the conflict bickering unendingly, casualty and fatality figures will continue to soar at an already seeming detriment to the future of Syria and the ever volatile Middle East.

Most intriguing and despicable to the unending conflict are the several unseemly proxy actions of world and regional powers who for reasons best known to their foreign policy interest have helped continue the Syrian conflict in full blast. What started as a heavy government response to protesters, led to army defections, suicide blasts, foreign linked fighters and recently and Al-Queda connection all of which does have a devastating imploding effect on Syria.

Whilst the Syrian conflict itself has been self destroying, the question of arming rebel groups is a conscience quiz in the hearts of the war weary western powers. With the ripples of Afghanistan and Iraq still fresh, there’s definitely not going to be any ‘western boot on the ground’. Arming the rebels is another teaser! And the question is who are they? On one hand is the Syrian National Coalition (SNC) who most powers (regional and western) have recognized as the legitimate Syrian government and on the other hand is the Free Syrian Army (a loose network of armed men fighting against the government). The shocker to the Syrian opposition is the incoherence of the opposition on both the political and military fronts. In fact, one may borrow the descriptive parlance of the Syrian government which refers to them as ‘Armed gangs’- A loose network of renegade soldiers, ‘men with guns’, foreign fighters and jihadists as represented by the Al-Nusra front who have only recently announced their cohesion into the main Al-Queda body. It’s obvious that though the opposition (political and military) are united against the Assad regime, the same cannot be said of their ideologies!

Another intrigue to the conflict is Syria’s vast stock piles of Chemical weapons. Known to be a deterrent to Israel, there are fears about it falling into unsafe hands. Most bothered about this is Israel who among other things, fear a massive armament of Hezbollah with ‘game changing weapons’. The US has since said any use of Chemical weapons will in effect demonstrate the crossing of a ‘red line’. Israel has since carried out series of air strikes on Syrian targets and what it believes are weapon being transferred to Hezbollah

Israeli Jets setting off to hit Syrian targets Source: BBC news

Hezbollah draws a multidimensional issue to the conflict. Already, it’s no more news that its fighters are actively engaged in the Syrian conflict providing much needed man power for Assad’s forces. That role in itself is another complex whole! Hezbollah is a Lebanon based Shiite militia wholly funded by Syria and Iran to provide much needed home aggression to the Zionist enemy-Israel. With its fighters actively engaged in the Syria and Israeli planes taking to the skies to hunt targets, it might just be a matter of time before Israel is dragged to a full scale war with whom? Maybe Hezbollah, but the battle ground would definitely be wider this time around. It will strew from southern Lebanon to Syria and with a Shiite led government already in place in an unstable Iraq, it might just provide the needed base for a regional conflict between Israel and ‘Greater Hezbollah’ (Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Iran). An already brewing sectarian conflict between the dominant minority Alawite offshoot of Shia Islam and the majority Sunnis cannot be brushed aside too.

A conflict laden Syria amid her conflict sensitive neighbours Source: BBC news

The indecision of western powers in arming the opposition must be given some thoughts; or how else will the Syrian scenario look with Assad out of power and lots of arms in the street with no decisive central government? The Iraqi situation answers the question.

On a critical note is the humanitarian dimension of the Syrian conflict. Whilst it has in itself been self destroying in terms of social and cultural infrastructure, Syrian males continue to provide the man power for the fighting, and Syrian females due to worsening economic situation caused by the conflict, are into haphazard marriage contracts where rich Arab males pay heavy bride prices for Syrian ladies in order to provide much needed funds for survival of the already dismembered Syrian families. Sadly such females end up in unhappy/ slave marriages.

It’s sad to write about the unfolding Syrian quagmire. One only hopes that the talk between the US and Russian foreign secretaries yield positive actions, else the third world war alert will shift from the activities in the Korean peninsula to the Middle East!

TURKEY—‘A MUCH NEEDED MIDDLE EASTERN POWER?’

The first major victory of the Seljuk Turks over the forces of the declining Byzantine Empire at the battle of Manzikert on 26th August 1071, gave prominence to the Turkic peoples especially those associated with Osman the great Turkish Muslim warrior. These peoples later became known as the Ottoman Turks or Osmanlılar (Turkish for “those associated with Osman”).

Like the battle of Gaugamela in 331BC, in which Alexander the great dealt a crushing blow to the glorious Persian armies of Darius III, the Seljuk Turks or Ottomans in series of military triumphs, dealt the final blow to what was left of Emperor Constantine’s empire in the levant in the subjugation of Constatinople by Mehmed II in 1453. The conversion of the Hagia Sophia (the capitol of orthodox Christianity and the seat of the Patriach of Constatinople) an architectural master piece of Athemios of Tralles and Isodorus of Miletus by the victorious Ottomans to a mosque emphatically announced the rise of another Islamic power after the decline of the glorious age of the Arab Caliphs and Caliphates.

The Ottomans (a non-Arab Muslim people) struck a chord different to the rulership style of their spiritual Arab brethren (the originators of Islam) in that, they sought a blend between the Orient and Occident. This was clearly emphasized in the administration of Sultan Mehmed II the Conqueror (1432-1481) to Süleyman I, The Magnificent (1494-1566), Sultan of the Ottoman Empire (1520-1566), during whose reign the empire reached its zenith of power and splendour. During his reign, the Ottomans rocked the gates of Vienna----the seat of the Hapsburgs and lords of the Holy Roman empire.

At a moment when the Arabs lacked natural leadership, the Ottomans (Spiritual Bethren of the majority Arab Muslim middle east), proved a congruous force in bringing the middle east at par with advances of the ever seeking dominant European powers. The Ottomans were able to effectively administer their heterogenous religious and ethnic populations with minimal issues of tensions among the various subjugated peoples.

                              A   PATH       TO         DECLINE

In signing the treaty of Karlowitz in 1699, the Ottoman Empire began to tread the path of a steady decline and non-relevance in international politics; and by the end the first world war in 1918, the Ottoman empire was in ruins! All subjugated peoples of the empire had gotten their agitation for independence and Constatinople (the Seat of Ottoman power) was under Allied (British, French and U.S) occupation.
At the moment of Ottoman desperation, a vanguard for Turkic liberation arose in Mustafa Kemal who in his nationalistic fervour  revoked the Treaty of Sèvres and pushed the Allied occupation force out of Constatinople. Abolishing what was left in the 623 year rule of the Ottoman Sultanate in deposition of Mehmed IV Vhadettin, Turkey became a republic on November 1, 1922. Mustafa Kemal, later known as Ataturk (Father of the Turks) instituted revolutionary reforms in his new found republic among which are:

  The abolishment of  the Sultanate and Caliphate (making Turkey a republic),

  The ban on the wearing of Islamic dress in public (the fez cap and the hijab),

  The separation of religion from state,

  The Latinization of the alphabetical characters used in writing the Turkish language—a departure from the use of Arabic alphabetical characters. He also de-Arabized the Turkish language.

  The introduction of European styled canonical law for governance.
Ever since then, Turkey began a pro-western path and it was no surprise when Turkey joined the western military alliance (NATO) in 1952; becoming a buffer against Soviet expansion in the Levant during the height of the cold war.

Thus, Turkey has been a darling to both the western powers and its Arab and Muslim neighbours in its unique relationship with both the middle orient and the occident. No wonder Turkey (a Muslim nation) has diplomatic relations with Israel (an unwanted entity to most Arabs) to the tune of joint military cooperations.

From its fall after the second world war, the population of Anatolia has witnessed a steady rise in Muslim population while the traditional Christian population has declined. Persecuted Muslim populations of the Caucasus found a welcoming home in Turkey and thus the Muslim population of Turkey has swelled from over 50% in the early 1900’s to 99%.


Despite Turkish attempts in joining the European Union after series of westernization policies, Turkish membership has been declined in reminisce of  its religious significance as a Muslim majority nation. This may not be seen as a set back for Turkish cause as she needs to identify her role as a bridge between the Levant and the Occident.

Whilst this role was well administered by the defunct Ottoman empire in its glory days, mordern day Turkey can draw an inspiration from its glorious Ottoman past. Her ability to chide Israel and still maintain diplomatic sanity with the Jewish state, walk arm in arms with the Western powers and still maintain spiritual communion with its Arab muslim neigbours most of whom practice Sunni Islam (the orthodox form of Islam) does lends a credence to any purported form of Turkish dominance of levantine politics.

Whilst Egypt, Iraq, and Syria have tried and failed trump the Arab and Muslim cause in the middle east and Iran (a majority Shiite nation) not seen as a credible option by most Sunni Arab Muslims, Turkey provides a worthy leadership.

At a time when western powers are wary of military intervention in the middle east in the face of inconclusive battles and withdrawals from Iraq and Afghanistan, there’s a vacuum for a Muslim leadership in the middle east as the Arab league lacks clear leadership vigour in tackling the unrest in the middle east.

As the Syrian conflict drags unending with countless hundreds of thousands of civilian causalities and the UN security council powers bickering their interests rather than resolve the quagmire, the initiative beckons on Turkey to front the leadership of the Muslim middle east!