It
may be that by the time you read this, we'll know more about the Battle of
Aleppo, which seems to be shaping up into one of those key moments that could
determine the outcome of what we can probably now call the Syrian civil war.
(The US is already warning that it fears government troops are preparing to
carry out a massacre there.)
Aleppo
is Syria's second largest city and its commercial hub, classified by UNESCO as
a world heritage site because of its priceless cultural and architectural
treasures. Until relatively recently, it had been able to stand aside from the
turmoil that was tearing the rest of the country apart.
Not
any more. A week after battles raged in parts of the capital, Damascus, now
it's Aleppo's turn, as the rebels ratchet up the pressure in the apparent
belief that their moment has come.
So
where does that leave Syria's neighbours, and where does it leave the rest of
the world? I was struck by a line this week in an impressively dispassionate
report from the defence policy think-tank the Royal United Services Institute:
" … the question of some sort of Western intervention in Syria has shifted
from a predilection to stay out of the conflict in any physical sense to an awareness
that intervention is looking increasingly likely. We are not moving towards
intervention but intervention is certainly moving towards us."
The
argument goes like this: increasingly foreign governments are worrying about
what's likely to happen when (not if) Bashar al-Assad is forced out. In the
words of RUSI's director, Professor Michael Clarke: "… the regional implications of this dynamic of violence are
more a driver of international diplomacy than the human misery inside Syria
itself."
Syria's
neighbour Lebanon is a tinderbox where just one spark can ignite a
conflagration; and Iraq and Iran, with their Shia majorities, are lined up
against Turkey and Saudi Arabia, with their Sunni majorities. Professor Clarke talks of an "arc of proxy confrontation"
between Iran and Saudi Arabia, which could lead to all kinds of trouble.
Perhaps
the question should be not "Will outside powers intervene in Syria?",
but "Will they intervene more than they are already?"
As
the RUSI report points out: " Already,
it is believed that western intelligence and special force operations are
actively underway … Western countries have backed the growing supply of arms,
via Arab sources, to rebel forces for some months now … Saudi Arabia and Qatar,
with US and Turkish facilitation, have been arming and funding the opposition;
and this covert support has been substantially responsible for the progress
opposition forces have made in recent weeks."
On
the government side, the report says: "Several Russian ships carrying a range of military
equipment for the Assad regime are already at sea …" And the Iranians are
unlikely to stand idly by if they see their strategic interests put at risk: in
order to preserve their influence with Shia groups in Lebanon, for example:
"the Iranians would provide weapons, materiel and probably elements of the
Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to support Assad, as they did successfully
with the Shia militias in Iraq."
No
one is suggesting that the West is likely to mount an Iraq-style international
ground invasion, nor even a Libya-style air campaign. But RUSI's Jonathan Eyal
has this stark warning: "Western governments which have long worked for
Assad’s departure should now begin to fear what may lie in store. For, instead
of imploding as other Arab countries did when they were gripped by revolutions,
Syria will explode, disgorging its troubles across the entire Middle East, with
potentially catastrophic consequences which will need to be managed, since they
look unlikely to be avoided."
And
he makes this additional point: "President Assad was [note the past tense]
the region’s last secular strongman, the last of the Arab leaders who repressed
religious and ethnic differences in the name of a higher pan-Arab ideology. His
method of government is now as defunct as that of the Soviet Union or communist
Eastern Europe, on which it was based."
Until
recently, the conventional wisdom was that international intervention in Syria
simply wasn't on the cards. If the RUSI report is right, it may be time to rethink
some of those assumptions: just watch the price of oil if tensions rise and
Western governments start to panic at the thought of further price pressures as
they struggle to save their faltering economies.
No comments:
Post a Comment