Introduction
Syria has been engulfed in violent conflict since 2011. This conflict, which started with the protests to overthrow president Bashar al-Assad, continues to devastate the country to date. According to Al-Gharbi (2013), the conflict has led to the death of over 70,000 people and the internal displacement of around 2.5 million Syrians. The international community has tried to step in and devise a solution to the problem.
However, there has been lack of agreement on how the conflict can be resolved. While most countries condemn the Assad regime, some continue to support the Syrian government. The US government has taken a stand against the Syrian government and called for the ouster of President Assad.
Even so, the US has not been able to take proactive action to hasten the fall of al-Assad due to opposition from some major world powers including Russia and China. For this reason, Syria is the most immediate and difficult policy issue facing the Obama Administration today. This paper will analyze the Syrian conflict and its effects on the US. It will then offer some solutions to the problem and recommend measures that might lead to a resolution of the conflict.
Impact of the Conflict
The Syrian conflict has considerably reduced US influence in the Middle East. As the world’s superpower, Washington has demonstrated significant influence in many regions all over the world. The Middle East has been one of the regions where the US has shown some considerable authority.
For example, it is a strong ally of the Saudi ruling family and it assisted in the toppling of the Libyan dictator, Muammar Gaddafi, in 2011. However, it has failed to take a bold step in the Syrian affair. This has resulted in a reduction in US influence due to the Obama administration’s inactivity.
The US has resisted direct military participation on behalf of the Syrian opposition forces and has shown great reluctance to supplying the opposition with weapons. Crowley (2013) observes that in spite of the fact that 70,000 people have already died in the Syrian conflict, President Obama has not taken any stringent action against the Assad regime. Instead, US involvement in the conflict has been limited to humanitarian aid.
This US inaction has reduced US influence in the region and some analysis argue that it will lead to even less influence in a post-Assad Syria (Crowley, 2013). Regional powers such as Turkey and Iran have played the most visible role in the conflict. Turkey has supported the rebel forces and facilitated talks between the Syrian government and the Opposition. This has reinforced Turkey’s position in the region.
The Syrian conflict has enlarged risks to US interests by increasing the presence of terrorist elements in the region. Before the conflict, the Syrian administration had a low tolerance to terrorist activities within the country’s boundaries. Using the security apparatus of the country, the Assad regime crushed any Islamic terrorist group that tried to establish itself in the country. The conflict in the country has led to unruliness in the country.
Terrorist organizations have ceased this opportunity to operate in the country. Some of the factions of the Syrian opposition are affiliated with terrorist organizations such as Al-Qaeda. Crowley (2013) documents that there are a number of Islamists with direct links to terrorist networks fighting for the opposition in Syria. By providing funding and military assistance to the Syrian opposition, the international community is strengthening terrorist organizations that might in future attack US targets.
Opposition forces in Syria have constantly called on the US to intervene militarily in the conflict. Opposition leaders are convinced that with US intervention, the Assad regime will be destroyed and the war will end. However, military intervention will be very costly for the US (Steele, 2012). Unlike in other countries where the US has intervened such as Libya, Syria has an advanced air defense system supplied by the Russians. Any US intervention would be met with a significant military action from the Syrian government.
The Syrian and US conflict has blocked US efforts at nurturing a strategic partnership with Syria and Iran. Freeman and Quandt (2013) reveal that it has always been a main objective of US policy in the Middle East to establish a good relationship with Iran. Iran and Syria are two of the largest and most influential Muslim states in the region, making them important prospective strategic partners for Washington. The Syrian conflict has forced the US to take a side against the Syrian government and its Iranian allies.
This has led to deterioration in the relationship between the US and these Middle East countries. Steele (2012) states that the US has tried to reduce Iranian influence in the Syrian affair. However, this has proved to be difficult, as Iran has continued to fund the Assad regime and provide it with the necessary military and economic support. This has been an unfavorable occurrence since Iran has publicly declared its opposition to the US and the country is constantly opposing US policy in the region.
Resolving the Conflict
The stability of the Middle East has been offset by the Syrian conflict. There are fears that if the conflict is prolonged, the region will become even more unstable as Syrian refugees move to neighboring countries and weapons are proliferated in the region. It is therefore in the best interest of the international community for the conflict to be resolved quickly.
The US continues to show great commitment to the events taking place in Syria. The Obama administration is keen to see the Syrian crisis resolved effectively and as soon as possible. However, the current efforts have not led to an end to the conflict. The US can use a number of methods to resolve the conflict.
Washington should provide military aid to the opposition forces that are trying to overthrow the Assad regime. The rebel forces have so far shown great commitment to ending the Assad reign. However, these forces are poorly equipped and they have been unable to hold strategic positions against the well-equipped government forces.
Haass (2013) agrees that while an armed intervention to end the fighting might lead to a large-scale civil war in the country, discrete military aid to opposition groups can help remove the current leadership without a potentially costly civil war outbreak in the country.
Some advocates of peaceful negotiations argue that arming the opposition will jeopardize the peace talks. This is not necessarily the case since a militarily strong opposition will force the Assad regime to opt for negotiations since the government will realize that it cannot win the war through military force.
The US should reach an agreement with Russia and Iran concerning the situation in Syria. While the conflict is going on among the Syrians, outside influence has been responsible for the prolonging of the conflict. The Syrian and US conflict is affected by the actions of countries that support the Syrian government.
Specifically, the economic, political, and military support offered to the Assad regime by Russia and Iran has ensured that his government has been able to withstand rebel forces and international pressure. Russia has provided Syria with advanced weaponry making it hard for the US to consider an all out military offensive against al-Assad. If the US can convince Russia and Iran to seek a peaceful end to the conflict, Assad would be forced to listen to his two key allies.
Conclusion
This paper set out to analyze the Syrian and US conflict and propose some solutions to the problem. It began by highlighting the significance of the Syrian conflict and the role that the US is expected to play as a major world power. The Syrian conflict has reduced American influence in the region and promoted terrorist organizations due to the breakdown of the Syrian security apparatus.
The conflict has also increased the influence that Iran has in the region and this is undesirable for US interests. The paper has recommended that the US should provide military aid to the opposition. This will encourage Assad to seek a diplomatic solution to the problem. In addition to this, the US can urge Russia and Iran to engage in cooperative efforts to end the conflict through diplomacy. By doing this, the Syrian conflict will end and US interests will be protected.
References
Al-Gharbi, M. (2013). Syria Contextualized: The Numbers Game. Middle East Policy, 20 (1), 56-67.
Crowley, M. (2013). A War He Does not Want. Time, 181 (15), 13-14.
Freeman, C., & Quandt, W.B. (2013). US Grand Strategy in the Middle East: Is There One? Middle East Policy, 20 (1), 1-29.
Haass, R. (2013). The Irony of American Strategy. Foreign Affairs, 92 (3), 57-67.
Steele, J. (2012). A Way Out of Syria’s Catastrophe. The Nation, 295 (16), 24-26.