It is now over one year since the Syrian protests, which kicked off in Dara’a, a small agricultural town in the country, begun. The Syrian police met the small uprising, which brought together a handful of people, with ruthlessness and brutality beyond the expectations of many people, thereby inciting more people to join the course.
Today, barely all towns in the country have experienced violent protests against the long reigning president Bashar Assad and his family. According to the United Nation’s estimates, approximately 9000 people, most of them soldiers, have died in the violence that has continued to rock most parts of the country[1].
However, human rights groups and journalist put the estimates much higher at 30, 000 people by October 2012. They claim that government’s efforts at hiding the real happenings in the country have led to a serious clamp down on any forms of journalistic access, thereby denying the international community any chance of getting up-to-date information on deaths, property destruction, and atrocities against women and the minority.
As a result, the international community has treated Syrian case slightly to the disadvantage of the country’s innocent citizens, especially women and children who are subjected to heinous acts such as rape, torture, and forced labor.
Therefore, Mr. President, if your government is to make any decisions based on the recommendations provided in this letter, I will be glad if you considered the possibility of worse things happening in Syrian beyond the grainy streaming media footages who may have watched, as they do not capture even half of what is happening on the ground.
As a nation founded on sound democratic principles and respect for human life and dignity, we have been drawn into this mess by our desire to give to the people of Syria, a democratic government, and an environment free from abuse, violence, and intimidations. So far, our attempts to institute a democratic government in Syrian and to end the suffering of the people have been futile.
Worst still, the rebels who have been fighting the government are ill-equipped to make any significant process towards toppling the government[2]. Their activities have remained limited to Damascus. This calls for drastic measures. Our ultimate goals in Syria are driven by both morals and concerns for the suffering civilians. We need to defend the civilians against military abuse.
We need to assist in the creation of a democratically elected government that is representative of the people’s wishes. However, the process of instituting a democratic government can never be easy. In most cases, it involves war and sanctions against doctorial regimes. Nevertheless, the Syrian people have spoken boldly of their desire for change, which makes any options available, regardless of the costs involved, worth pursuing.
Additionally, we need to prevent Syria’s situation from dragging it into a failed and war-ridden state like Somalia. If this trend continues unchecked, then the nation could end up in a situation like that of Somalia. Finally yet importantly, we should strive to ensure that the country’s chemical weapons do not end up in the hands of extremist Islamic groups who are known for “terrorist activities” in the world today[3].
The United States of America suffered severely in the hands of terrorists and should not spare any efforts in fighting them.[4] The 9/11 attack has and will remain in the minds of many people who lost their loved ones for many years to come. In that single attack, the U.S lost millions of dollars and thousands of lives.[5]
Given the circumstances surrounding the Syrian case, American intervention is in complete interest of the nation and its citizens. The U.S government’s principal interest is to protect its citizens. However, protecting Americans, does not only involve securing the country’s borders, but also toppling all governments that are sympathetic to terrorists and regimes that promote the use of chemicals and illegal atomic weapons.
Bashar Assad’s government trades in these unfriendly territories and the U.S government should not sit back and watch from the sidelines as it furthers its monstrous activities. The people of Syria have a right to determine their own future since the country is a sovereign state[6].
However, its leadership has ignored the people’s plea for regime change, thereby necessitating external intervention. The U.S is perceived by many states as the international watchdog. Therefore, it should take a center stage in securing a solution for Syria’s problems.
However, our intervention in Syria should be wise and well calculated. Considering Bashar Assad’s close association with the Iran and Russian regimes, any form of military intervention could worsen the bad situation[7]. The most viable option is the involvement of the UN Security Council to give a mandate on the issue. Our direct involvement should be through the provision of troops to secure civilian population from harm.
Even though most Arab Nations are reluctant to join the Syrian debate, the U.S should try to reach out to them to seek their support in rescuing innocent civilians. The rebels fighting Bashar Assad’s government share many common interests with the United States. As such, the U.S should provide them with logistics to enhance their chances of overthrowing the dictatorial regime. Currently, they are ill equipped and lack experience of fighting; hence, their chances of success are thin.
The decisions we make today define us as a nation. The freedom our citizens enjoy today was earned by both sweet and blood. Therefore, by assisting the people of Syria, we are showing them away to a better life.
By actively championing for a regime change in Syria, we will obviously be attracting more responsibilities to our great nation, but we cannot afford to sit back and watch innocent people die in the hands of merciless and selfish leaders. The minority and the weak always look up to us for help in such times, and we cannot afford to disappoint them.
Our failure to intervene will be viewed as a sign of weakness, which might encourage other regimes to cling onto power against public will. After the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, the U.S. relationship with the Muslim world has not been good[8]. Therefore, many of the Muslim states cannot welcome any form of intervention in Syria. Even though military intervention can absolutely spark wide opposition, many, especially civilians, could view humanitarian aid and provision of logistics as pure and sincere assistance.
Our involvement in Syria should only end when the country has attained democratic leadership. Military personnel deployed to help civilians should however, stay behind for some time to assist in the transition process. Up to now, the atrocities committed against civilians in Syrian are intolerable, but the U.S must trade carefully.
However, if death toll from the uprisings continue to rise and other nations, especially Muslim nations, keep their distance, then, the U.S may be left no other choice but to intervene with a fully-fledge military battalion. This could be more involving and costly, but worth the lives of innocent Syrians used as punching bags by government soldiers and rebels.
Disregard for human lives by the Syrian government will leave us no options, but to pull together our resources, monetary, logistics, and personnel, to rescue the civilians. When it comes to such a level, the Security Council’s decisions will be of little effect to the U.S intervention in Syria. The cost of the war in Iraq has been expensive and we must avoid adding further expenses to our already burdened public. However, when it comes to saving lives, our options are limited.
Works Cited
Bowen, Jeremy. “BBC News – Syria rebels gain foothold in Damascus.” BBC – Homepage. N.p., 28 Jan. 2012. Web.
Breakingnews.com. “Syrian Violence Kills 36; Arab Leaders Back Peace Plan.” VOA – Voice of America English News – VOA News. N.p., 28 Mar. 2012. Web.
Celmer, Marc A.. Terrorism, U.S. strategy, and Reagan policies. New York: Greenwood Press, 1987. Print.
Davies, Nicolas J.S.. Blood on our hands: the American invasion and destruction of Iraq. Version 1.0. ed. Ann Arbor: Nimble Books, LLC, 2010. Print.
Goodarzi, Jubin M.. Syria and Iran: diplomatic alliance and power politics in the Middle East. London: Tauris Academic Studies, 2006. Print.
Madu, Ifeanyi V.. Islamic Extremism and the West: Expounding the Negative Implications of the Clash Between Islamic Extremists and Some Western Nations. London: ProQuest, 2008. Print.
Quigley, John B.. The statehood of Palestine: international law in the Middle East conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. Print.
Sidhu, Surinder Singh. 9/11: The Inside Story. Washington, DC: Strategic Book Publishing, 2012. Print.
Footnotes
- Breakingnews.com. “Syrian Violence Kills 36; Arab Leaders Back Peace Plan.” VOA – Voice of America English News – VOA News. N.p., 28 Mar. 2012. Web.
- Bowen, Jeremy. “BBC News – Syria rebels gain foothold in Damascus.”BBC – Homepage. N.p., 28 Jan. 2012. Web.
- Ifeanyi Madu, Islamic Extremism and the West: Expounding the Negative Implications of the Clash Between Islamic Extremists and Some Western Nations (London: ProQuest, 2008) 105.
- Celmer, Marc, Terrorism, U.S. strategy, and Reagan policies. New York: Greenwood Press, 1987. P. 47 Print.
- Surinder Singh Sidhu, 9/11: The Inside Story (Washington, DC: Strategic Book Publishing, 2012) 29.
- John B. Quigley, The statehood of Palestine: international law in the Middle East conflict (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010) 45.
- Jubin M. Goodarzi, Syria and Iran: diplomatic alliance and power politics in the Middle East, (London: Tauris Academic Studies, 2006) 11.
- Nicolas J.S. Davies, Blood on our hands: the American invasion and destruction of Iraq (Version 1.0. ed. Ann Arbor: Nimble Books, LLC, 2010) 32.