Inside StoryMon-Fri 6:30pm ET/3:30pm PT
Ahmed Hasan Ubeyd/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images
The leaders of the main Syrian opposition umbrella group head to the White House at a time when it looks more and more as though Assad might hang on … but hang on to what? His country is in ruins, its people scattered, its economy destroyed. Militias of battle-hardened Islamist militants have metastasized throughout the country. It has become even harder than it was at the beginning of the war to imagine Syria in the coming years, how it will become a normal country again.
After nearly two years of trying to end the war in Syria, the joint United Nations–Arab League envoy to Syria, Lakhdar Brahimi, announced his resignation in New York.
In a press conference, Brahimi said, “I’m sure that the crisis will end. The question is only and this. Everybody who has a responsibility and an influence in this situation has to remember that the question is, How many more dead and how much more destruction?”
More than 150,000 people have died in the conflict, according to activists. Millions more have been internally displaced or have fled to neighboring nations.
Syrian National Coalition President Ahmed Jarba is in Washington this week, pleading for more assistance from his allies in the U.S. to take down Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad.
Ahmad Jarba
Syrian opposition leader
The United States has been hesitant to put more weapons into a theater of war that has morphed into a collection of disparate groups, from Syrian rebels to foreign jihad fighters, all bent on taking control of Syria.
The U.S. plans to send Secretary of State John Kerry to London next week to attend another Friends of Syria meeting.
Syria’s opposition has struggled with internal militia groups, including Islamic extremists who crossed borders to fight them and the regime.
A turning point in the conflict came last week when Syrian opposition forces surrendered the stronghold of Homs, dubbed the capital of the revolution. It was in exchange for safe passage to the northern countryside.
The city had been under siege for months. Food, water and medicine have been scarce.
The rebel withdrawal from Homs is widely seen as a victory for Assad, whose military, having been forced to surrender its chemical weapons, has been using harsher tactics.
Reports center on deadly helicopter-dropped barrel bombs, some packed with chlorine canisters.
Assad is comfortable enough to have declared himself a candidate for president again, in an election he scheduled for June. The U.S. has already called the election a “sham.”
We spoke with some experts on Middle East politics. Here are their thoughts on the crisis in Syria and the U.S.’s role in it.
Is Iran vindicated by the pullout from Homs?
Nader Hashemi: To a certain degree they should be, because the conquest of Homs by the Assad regime and the tipping of the military balance in Syria has clearly favored the Assad regime, and Iran is backing them. One has to distinguish between the short-term and long-term perspective. There is no denying Assad’s gains. But in the long term, there can be no stability as long as the Assad regime remains in power. Seventy-four percent of the population is Sunni Muslim. There is no way to subjugate that part of the population for so long. It is important to point out that these gains that the Assad regime has made and Iran is celebrating is a direct result of American decisions to allow crimes against humanity by Assad. If there is a change in Washington and other Western capitals, there should be a lot of concern in Tehran.
Nader Hashemi
professor, Middle East studies, Univ. of Denver
What would Western support look like at this stage?
It would look like what worked in Libya two or three years ago. It would be significant air support to take down helicopters and barrel-bombing aircraft. It would be serious and sustained support for the moderates. There is a lot more Washington can and should be doing. It is clear from the crisis in Ukraine that trying to work with Russia is a dead end. Washington has to make a decision whether it will make new calculations that will exclude Russia from negotiations. It basically means a reassessment of Obama’s entire foreign policy approach, one that challenges Russia at U.N. Security Council and tries to change reality on the ground in Syria.
And if Assad wins, what can the international community and the U.S. do to help country rebuild?
Absolutely nothing, if that is the case. If Assad reconquers the territory and re-establishes control, the international community must bow down before him. Compromise with Sunnis would be at the complete discretion of Assad and Moscow. The international community has zero leverage. It will be a major defeat for any sort of peace, sense of stability, and a huge victory of for the forces of authoritarianism.
So it is all or nothing, then?
We are not just talking about a civil war conflict on a very low scale where we can engage in dialogue with one of two sides. We are talking about one of the worst humanitarian crises in the last century that is borderline genocidal. If you want to engage in a policy of engagement, you have to be cognizant of the fact it will occur on Assad’s terms. It will be a complete capitulation by the international community to the wishes of the Assad regime. It would be as if Slobodan Milosevic had completely conquered the former Yugoslavia in the ’90s. You could still establish humanitarian aid, but it would be on the terms of the victor.
Seyed Mohammad Marandi is a professor of North American studies and the dean of the faculty of world studies at the University of Tehran. He is an honorary research fellow in the department of American and Canadian studies at the University of Birmingham in England. He completed his Ph.D. at the University of Birmingham. His main interests are American literature, literary theory, U.S. history and U.S. foreign policy.
Seyed Mohammad Marandi
professor, North American studies, Univ. of Tehran
What is next for Syria? What can be done to help?
Seyed Mohammad Marandi: The most important thing that has to be done is for the U.S. to swallow its pride and abide by international law and international order it created. Even though it is biased in America’s favor, they do not abide by that. The extremism that has infected Syria has infected the region, and it is now a threat to Europe. The Americans and Saudis must tackle responsibility for this spread of extremism. The spread of groups like Boko Haram is a result of this approach. If the U.S. is going to change this situation, it must change its behavior.
Rebuilding Syria an area of common cause for Iran and the West?
I don’t think the Americans have any interest in rebuilding Syria. Their interest has been in destroying Syria. Have they built Libya? They have destroyed Libya. Have they built Iraq? They destroyed Iraq. There is no evidence that the United States has ever had a constructive role to play in this part of the world. I have been in Iraq and Syria multiple times in the past year. All I have seen is destruction.
What can be done by people in the international community concerned about the welfare and future of Syria?
There is a lot that the international community can do. The problem is that Western countries and the U.S. consider themselves the international community. Any atrocity they commit is seen as good intentions gone wrong, so it is very difficult for the international community to do anything positive. There is no accountability for any actions carried out by the United States and its allies. America and its allies dominate world politics. That is diminishing rapidly, for good or for ill. This is undoubtedly a good thing, but whether its rivals are any better is another question altogether.
Error
Sorry, your comment was not saved due to a technical problem. Please try again later or using a different browser.