West 1 Tracy West Professor Fiona Harris-Ramsby English 1010-059 2 December 2013 A Land on the Brink: Turmoil in Syria

Despite efforts of the International Community to disarm the Syrian government of their chemical warfare capabilities, there are those who say that the real issues that have surfaced throughout the Syrian uprising are being ignored. This is a look at the impact of the Syrian crisis on the various factions that have been involved, as well as the international view of the humanitarian crisis that has resulted from it. Browsing the timeline of the chain of events that led Syria to the brink of destruction seems to be rather cut and dried; however, when a broader perspective is taken it becomes more clouded and certainly more difficult to fall firmly on the side of one response or the other. From the obvious view point of the Syrian civilians and rebels to the impact of the conflict on the foreign policies of other countries, the desired response to the malady covers the entire spectrum.

Timeline of Syrian Events March of 2011 civil unrest began to become evident as the Syrian population began to see protests take place in rapid succession. As Anup Kaphle wrote in his article, Timeline: Unrest in Syria for the Washington Post, Syrians held a Day of Dignity protest in Damascus demanding the release of several political prisoners, while on the same day in Daraa they held a Day of Rage rally where several people were killed by security forces sparking unrest and clashes with the governmental forces. In response to the Uprisings, the Syrian leader, Bashar al

West 2 Assad deployed military forces into the inflamed regions. Kaphle observed the bluntness of the Assad regimes response when he stated Army tanks roll into Homs, Daraa and areas of Damascus in a bid to quash anti-regime protesters.(Kaphle). It was at this point that the United States strengthened sanctions against Syria in response to the malicious tactics. (Kaphle). In July of 2011 hundreds were reportedly killed in Hama by the governmental forces in response to a city wide demonstration that brought thousands of protestors out into the streets. (Kaphle). This brought a response by the United States that called for the removal of Bashar al Assad as President of Syria, as well as placing a freeze on all assets of the Syrian government that fell within the jurisdiction of the United States. (Kaphle). The Arab League which is a group of Arab states joined together to further their interests in the global community, dismissed Syria in November of 2011 following these atrocities. This was most notable due to the fact that Syria was one of the countries who founded the Arab League. (Kaphle). November also marked the first major offensive of the Free Syrian Army, the name under which the rebel coalition had united, where they attacked a military base in Damascus. Kaphle called this attack one of the most high-profile anti-government offensives to date (Kaphle). Russia and China continually blocked the United Nations resolution condemning the actions of the Syrian government and in February of 2012, the resolution fell once more. The United States closed its embassy in Damascus following the blocked resolution citing security concerns, while just a day following the closure the Syrian government continued to shell the city of Homs where as many as 200 more people were reportedly killed. (Kaphle). Escalation continued until April of 2012 when the United Nations brokered a cease fire between the rebel and governmental forces. When the cease fire went into effect, the government asserted that they

West 3 had succeeded in suppressing the rebel forces, this inflamed the rebel fervor bringing retaliatory comments by rebel forces citing the massacre of civilians by the government forces during the cease fire. With all of the animosity building, the U.N. was forced to suspend its efforts on June 16, 2012 citing the inability of its team to fulfill its obligations due to the escalating violence. (Kaphle). In August of 2012, just one month after the U.N. withdrawal, there was a massacre of primarily women and small children by pro-government forces in the village of Houla where 100 were reportedly slaughtered. The U.N. accused the Syrian government of war crimes for the first time in response to the reported atrocity. In December of 2012 the rebels made headway as they captured governmental military bases in Damascus against weakened military forces, but in January of 2013 at least 65 bodies were found in the city of Aleppo, many with their hands bound and having been shot execution style. This was again reported to have been the machinations of the government sponsored troops. (Kaphle). On August 21, 2013 the reports of a suspected chemical attack on a Syrian village began to buzz throughout global media. Rebel forces were accusing the government of attacking a civilian population with Sarin gas as they slept killing many and inundating local hospitals with those who survived. (Kaphle). It took only five days for U.N. chemical weapons inspectors to enter Syria to investigate the accusations, but they were fired upon by snipers as they approached the area in question. (Kaphle). When they were finally able to access the area they were able to confirm that an attack using Sarin gas had indeed been employed. On August 30, 2012 U.S. intelligence released their assessment of the attack where they indicated that approximately 1500 people had been killed in the attacks. (Kaphle). The intelligence also indicated that the U.S. had tracked the actual munitions from their originating point within government controlled

West 4 installations to their destinations of the affected areas. On August 31, 2012 United States President, Barrack Obama, called for a vote to determine the response the U.S. would yield. (Kaphle) As tensions began to rise between Syria and the International community, the U.S. and Russia began to display growing differences concerning an appropriate response to the chemical attacks. It took the U.S. coming to the brink of a military retaliation against the Assad regime before Russia proposed a chemical disarmament plan for Syria in a last ditch effort. The U.S. voted to withhold military action for the time being and the disarmament plan was set into action in September of 2012. (Kaphle)

The Syrian Peoples View of American Foreign Policy Regarding the Crisis Eyal Zisser explored the impact of the United States foreign policy on the common Arabic people in regards to Syria dating back to President George W. Bushs term in office. In his article The Failure of U.S. Policy toward Damascus published in the Middle East Quarterly, Zisser expresses the frustration the population holds for the lack of integrity the U.S. has shown in the region. Zisser observed, The outbreak of revolution in Syria in March 2011 was met with silence in Washington. Instead of issuing a resolute call to the Syrian ruler to step down, as in the pressure exerted on Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak in February... This underlines the inconsistency the U.S. government has exhibited in the region and clearly demonstrates the motives for distrust held by the Syrian population (Zisser 62). The Arab people of the region have held disdain for invading cultures over the centuries and Zisser claims that the hatred portrayed by the people of the region towards the U.S. is because for them, it is the most recent and convenient other. To the Arabs, Washingtons

West 5 international state of success and status is, despite whatever current economic problems it faces, a constant reminder of Arab decline from its glorious past. (Zisser 64). Without a change in the current policy of the U.S. there is likely to be little change in the perception of the people towards the super power. The inaction of the U.S. has left the region in a state of distrust and vulnerable to the influence of extremist persuasions (Zisser 65). Daniel Henninger of the Wall Street Journal noted in his opinion piece entitled Obamas Redline Presidency, that Policy makers in Washington, Paris, Riyadh, Jerusalem and Damascus expected the U.S. to hit Assad's air-force assets following the Sarin gas attacks employed by the Assad regime in retaliation for the uprisings. (Henninger). Although the expectations of the International community were for the U.S. to respond in force, Henninger explains that the military response never developed. In fact Henninger said that of the first tangible results of the U.S. inaction that the Syrian civil war evaporated from the news. The war didn't stop; it vanished.(Henninger). This implied that not only did the U.S. choose not to act on the inhumane actions of the Assad regime, but that it then promptly began to ignore the devastation and continued unrest.

Syrian People and Their Turkey Neighbors Regarding the Crisis Nursin Atesoglu Guney has a different perspective as he looked at the need for a resolution through the eyes of Turkey in his article A New Challenge for Turkey: Civil War in Syria published in Insight Turkey. With the civil unrest growing within the Syrian borders, more and more refugees purge the borders of Syrias neighboring countries and Turkey is no exception. It is not the influx of refugees alone that Guney portrays as the real danger but rather the contagious unrest that seems to accompany the rebellion. (Guney 51).

West 6 Guney acknowledged that since the decision of Turkeys policy makers to back the rebel forces in Syria Turkey has been exposed to both soft and hard security threats. With over 500,000 refugees having already crossed the border, standard security measures have been made a nightmare and the clashes with the Syrian government have not gone without notice as the downing of a Turkish jet, frequent instances of border violations and mortar shelling, and of course the terror attacks in Reyhanl, were all attributable to the Assad regimes actions. Guney speculated that If the international community does not act in Syria beyond the US-Russian deal on chemical weapons or attain the conditions necessary for a ceasefire, which in turn would lead to the formation of a transformational government, there is a very high probability that Turkey will continue to be vulnerable to hard and soft security threats along its 900 kilometer Southern border. This is clear indication of the desire of the Turkish government to have international intervention within the Syrian conflict. (Guney 52). In a supporting article entitled "Turkey's Spymaster Plots Own Course on Syria," authors Adam Entous and Joe Parkinson examine the policy change of Turkey under the influence of security head Hakan Fidan. The article makes clear the intentions of the Turkey leadership and its military as the authors indicate that Turkey's generals are now subservient to Mr. Erdogan and his closest advisers, Mr. Fidan and Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, who are using the Arab Spring to shift Turkey's focus toward expanding its regional leadership.(Entous). This suggests that Turkey is in favor of supporting the resistance in Syria in a bid to gain influence and control in the region while the other NATO member states have elected to stay indifferent to the revolution. (Entous)

West 7 Russian Stance on the Syrian Crisis Another perspective on the Syrian crisis and possible resolutions can be found when observing the impact of the crisis on the U.S. and Russias foreign policy. Roy Allison takes a look at the implications the conflict and resolution in Syria hold for Russia in his article Russia and Syria: explaining alignment with a regime in crisis published in International Affairs. Allison believes that much of Russias resistance to a military response in Syria is due to their desire to maintain a surrogate relationship with a country in the Middle East thereby maintaining a foothold in the region. As the tensions have increased Allison asserts that with Russias de facto alignment with Damascus, reaffirmed at the June 2013 G8 summit, has left Russia increasingly isolated internationally. He also states that Even China has chosen to keep a relatively low profile over the conflict.(Allison 795). Russia has chosen to shield the Assad regime from the beginning of the revolution and Allison explains that Moscow has remained adamant that it will block any possible track towards a UN Chapter VII intervention and block even sanctions against Syria that might move in that direction, making it clear that there is little Russian interest in allowing the removal of the Assad regime. (Allison 796). It is also evident that, given the unwavering backing Russia has had for the Assad regime, Moscow has no desire to even weaken the regime by opposing it at any level. Allison states that it is hard to describe the relationship of the two countries as anything less than an alignment of mutual convenience.(Allison 796). Richard Wietz, a columnist for World Politics Review, wrote in his column entitled Global Insights: Despite Mounting Costs, Russia Sticks by Syria's Assad that Russia was determined to see the events in Syria as a civil war between armed factions, including alQaida, rather than a popular revolution by an oppressed people against a brutal authoritarian

West 8 dictator. (Weitz). Weitz indicates that this position eases the stance Russia has taken in suggesting that a peace through negotiation is far more plausible. (Weitz). The reluctance of Russia to release its grasp on the Assad regime can be attributed to recent history as Weitz points out that this was already Moscow's experience after the fall of Moammar Gadhafi in Libya, where the new government sharply reduced economic ties with Russia. (Weitz) This example of a reduction in Russian influence in the region is a strong statement exhibiting a motive for Russia to exhibit such a strong reluctance to concede Syria.

The United States Stance on the Syrian Conflict A final perspective on the Syrian crisis and the possible responses can be found when examining the perspective of the U.S. and its constituents. Armen Oganesyan wrote an article examining the mood of the U.S. people after the debacles in Iraq and Afghanistan, when considering the prospect of once again entering into a conflict with another failed Middle Eastern Arab state. His article entitled Syria: Who Will Take Responsibility for the "Responsibility to Protect"? which was published in International Affairs, points out the past of the U.S. when dealing in foreign policy. (Oganesyan 119). Oganesyan says that while the U.S. has often fancied itself as the guarantor of global security it is to be noted that it has never considered military intervention to prevent or put an end to a conflict over the violation of human rights. This point is made in stark contrast to the very reason many who are for intervention make to substantiate a military response to the chemical attacks. He further backs up this claim when he refers to the fact that the United States did not intervene in any way in a situation where chemical weapons were used during the Iran -Iraq war. As there is already precedence for the current

West 9 circumstances, there should be little surprise that the U.S. has been so slow to respond. (Oganesyan 117) With the U.N. passing the resolution proclaiming the responsibility to protect, Oganesyan asks the question, who will be responsible for the responsibility to protect. It is speculated that all too often that responsibility has fallen on U.S. shoulders and the financial as well as humanitarian costs have not been equally shared. Oganesyan argues that the resolution should be a joint venture when he states it is the fact that no one today is a one-man force, or carries "the white man's burden in relation to the rest of the world. (Oganesyan 119). A response should be a collaboration between nations and not a geopolitical move by a super power. (Oganesyan 119). While the argument certainly exists that the U.S. has done more than its share in securing world security threats, James Kitfield writes in his article for National Journal entitled How AlQaida Could Drag Us into Syria, that circumstances in the collapsing region could force the United States into as response. He implies the that the hand may have been forced when powerful affiliates of al-Qaida, especially the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria and al-Nusra Front, were planting al-Qaida's black flag in northern Syria. (Kitfield). This creates a diplomatic nightmare as al-Nusra was responsible for the thousands of deaths in their suicide bombing campaign propagated under their former head Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. (Kitfield) While alZarqawi was killed by a U.S. airstrike in 2006, the threat that the organization represents has the potential of plunging the U.S. into another Afghanistan or Iraqi scenario promising a long, expensive and wildly unpopular military campaign. (Kitfield). Kitfield makes it clear that the U.S. is rapidly being drawn in and he claims that the Obama administration cannot plausibly argue that the United States has no dog in the Syrian fight. (Kitfield). The circumstances in

West 10 Syria have definitely upped the stakes for the U.S., after all, as Kitfield writes, history suggests that wherever al-Qaida and its affiliates take root and thrive, war inevitably comes to the United States and the West, whether we want it or not. In conclusion it is evident that there has been a humanitarian atrocity committed by the Assad regime, but that is not the end of the story. There are factions within factions and powers fighting to maintain footholds all at the expense of innocent civilians. With little influence the most the Syrian public can hope for is a swift resolution on a global scale that might cut short the violence and displacement that plagues the region.

West 11 Works Cited

Allison, Roy. Russia and Syria: explaining alignment with a regime in crisis. International Affairs. Vol. 89 Issue 4 (2013): 795-823. Print. Atesoglu Guney, Nursin. A New Challenge for Turkey: Civil War in Syria. Insight Turkey. Vol. 15 Issue 4 (2013): 51-59. Print. Entous, Adam, and Joe Parkinson. "Turkey's Spymaster Plots Own Course on Syria. (Cover story)." Wall Street Journal - Eastern Edition 10 Oct. 2013: A1+. Academic Search Premier. Web. 13 Dec. 2013. Henninger, Daniel. "Obama's Red-Line Presidency." Wall Street Journal - Eastern Edition 05 Dec. 2013: A17. Academic Search Premier. Web. 13 Dec. 2013. Kaphle, Anup. Timeline: Unrest in Syria. WashingtonPost.com. Washington Post, 31 Oct. 2013. Web. 2 Dec. 2013. Kitfield, James. "How Al-Qaida Could Drag Us Into Syria." National Journal (2013): 10. Academic Search Premier. Web. 13 Dec. 2013. Oganesyan, Armen. Syria: Who Will Take Responsibility for the "Responsibility to Protect"? International Affairs: A Russian Journal of World Politics, Diplomacy & International Relations. Vol. 59 Issue 5 (2013): 115-117. Print. Weitz, Richard. "Global Insights: Despite Mounting Costs, Russia Sticks By Syria's Assad." World Politics Review (2013): 1.Academic Search Premier. Web. 13 Dec. 2013. Zisser, Eyal. The Failure of U.S. Policy toward Damascus. Middle East Quarterly. Vol. 20 Issue 4 (2013): 59-65. Print.

West 12