Friday Food for Thought #13

Syrian Intervention

Week 4, Month 9, Episode #13

In 1949, the United Nations passed Security Council Resolution 82 which authorized the use of military force against North Korea.  The only reason the resolution passed was that the Soviet Union's representative was not present and China was still represented by the Republic of China (now known as Taiwan).  On August 28th, 2013 the representatives of the People's Republic of China and Russian Federation walked out of a Security Council Meeting on Syria.  They're lucky the United States, United Kingdom, and France didn't leap on the opportunity and hammer a resolution through while they were gone, unless that was what the PRC and RF were hoping would be done (so that they wouldn't be in the politically untenable position of supporting a dictatorship that uses Chemical Weapons).

I know that I am almost certainly in the minority but I think that a military intervention is almost certain and would be better done sooner than later.  There are a number of reasons for this and I'll be breaking them down as I go, but first off I feel I should start out by refuting a number of common misconceptions about the conflict.

The Syrian Civil War is not and never has been an exclusively 'internal matter'.

Like the Spanish Civil War of the 1930s, the Iran-Iraq War of the 1980s, and countless other wars throughout history, the Syrian Civil War isn't so much a war but a front in another conflict.  In fact, it's a front for more than one.  It is a proxy war between the Shiites and Sunnis of the Middle East, a proxy war between Iran and Israel, and a front in the larger geopolitical conflict between the ideals of Western Democracy and Eastern Totalitarianism.

Since the war began, Iran has been supplying arms, mercenaries, and foreign volunteers to the Syrian government.  The reasoning behind this is many fold but fundamentally comes down to this... The Syrian regime is Iran's greatest ally in a region filled with foes, it is the funnel through which Iran supports Hezbollah in Lebanon and against Israel.  Until Saddam Hussein's regime was toppled, Iran's only friend was Syria and even now Iraq may be friendly with Iran but it is not an ally.

Additionally Russia and China have vested interest in the region. 

For lack of a better description, Russia considers Syria part of its sphere of influence and the naval base it leases from them is their only real means of projecting power into the Mediterranean.  The Russian Federation doesn't want either a pro-American Democratic Government in Syria or an Islamist State. Instead they wish to have what they already possess a friend regime that is dependent on them for international protection and military arms.

China is a major trading partner with Syria but also is supportive of the regime for a more fundamental reason.  China does not want to see any totalitarian regime fall due to rebellion or revolt, especially due to a Muslim led revolution.  This is because China does not want to see any of its more outlying provinces become a hotbed for revolution and rebellion.  Already they've used military force to suppress a number of protests in their outlying Western Provinces and want to be allowed a free hand in how to deal with any future revolts.

The Attacks (Yes Plural)

The Ghouta Attack (as Wikipedia has come to call the attack on August 21st) was the largest scale chemical attack that has taken place in the Syrian Civil War, but it is likely that this wasn’t the first such incident.

The first reports of the use of Chemical Weapons occurred on December 23^rd 2012, when Al Jazeera reported an attack in the city of Homs that killed seven people.  In March of 2013 reports began to come in of multiple attacks using Scuds loaded with chemical weapons on rebel positions in Aleppo and Damascus.  With the support of Russia, Syria managed to redirect blame for these attacks onto the rebels.

I have one question, how many rebels know how to properly aim a Scud, and why would they bomb themselves?

Reports of these chemical weapon strikes have continued since then, with the largest being the Ghouta Attack, which according to US intelligence killed 1,429 people.  The Ghouta Attack happened in conjunction with Syrian Government forces attacking rebel positions around Damascus and its suburbs.

The attack began at 03:00 in the morning with a barrage of rocket fire that rebel forces reported ‘didn’t explode’.  Within minutes thousands of the local residents and rebel forces were casualties of the attack.  From the reports the most likely culprit would be Sarin or VX, both of which are nerve agents which quickly disperse after deployment and remain toxic for only around thirty minutes.

The positions which were attacked have been under siege by government forces for some time.  The idea that this attack was done by the rebels is downright preposterous.

Since then, the attacks haven’t stopped.  This morning, CNN aired footage from Syria that was recorded Monday showing a number of teens that had been exposed to a chemical agent in the school, which initial reports had thought were just an incendiary attack instead of a chemical one.  Considering the footage, it looks as though they have been exposed to some sort of blister agent like mustard gas.  Reports indicate the presence of Syrian aircraft at the time, suggesting that the weapon was delivered by an aerial bomb.

So why should we get involved?

1.)  Refusing to Intervene gives tacit approval to Syria and other totalitarian governments for the use of Chemical Weapons on their own people.

In short, not intervening is almost as good as authorizing them to gas their own people.  The only real deterrent for the use of Chemical Weapons or Ethnic Cleansing is the threat of international intervention or being struck by such weapons in turn. 

For a regime desperate to hold onto power against a rebellion or revolt, chemical weapons are one of their most effective weapons.  Rebel fighters are likely to not be equipped for chemical warfare in that they lack the training and equipment to protect themselves, as a result chemical weapons are at their most lethal against rebels and other untrained foes.

2.) The Syrian Civil War is an Ethnic Conflict and we should intervene before the Syrian Army starts digging mass graves.

Who remembers the War in Bosnia and Kosovo Conflict beside me and my old friend Krenare from Kosovo?

From March of 1992 to December of 1995 the country of Bosnia was embroiled in a viscous war, a war which started with the breakup of the country of Yugoslavia along ethnic lines.  During the war, the former Yugoslavian army and later Serbian forces conducted an organized campaign of ethnic cleansing involving mass killings and systematic rape.  It wasn’t until NATO intervened in 1995 that the conflict began to come to an end.

Like Bosnia, the Syrian war is an Ethnic Conflict with Sunnis lining up on one side and Shiites on the other.  Shiites from the Iranian Revolutionary Guard are serving as military advisors for Syria while Hezbollah provides direct military support.  Sunni Islamic groups are flooding the country with foreign volunteers as well.

The Kurds are guarding their homes against attack from both sides.

Already around three times as many civilians have died in War in Syria as died in the Bosnian War.  With the ethnic angle combined with a regime demonstrating a willingness to use chemical weapons, it’s only a matter of time before a campaign of ethnic violence begins, if it hasn’t already.  In Bosnia, NATO was too late for nearly 40K civilians, already 100K have died in Syria.

Already we’ve failed, let us not fail any more.

3.) The worst case scenario…

You know what other country had a long brutal civil war with most of the same players in the 90s?  I’ll give you two guesses…

AFGHANISTAN

I really shouldn’t have to say what happened because of that.