Several people have asked me recently what the heck is going on in Syria. So I've written a brief run down of what's going on and how we got here. This is meant as a primer, and a lot of what I wrote is admittedly overly simplified. But hopefully it captures the important stuff without obfuscating too much.
This is what is happening in Syria:
Inspired by other Arab uprisings, the Syrian people began a
peaceful movement in 2011 to reform and later overthrow the regime of Bashar
Assad. Bashar and his father Hafez before him have ruled Syria with an iron
grip for decades. It was therefore no surprise the regime responded with a
violent crackdown. Assad promised that the region would burn if the international
community supported the opposition.
The Syrian opposition failed to unify in the face of regime
violence, as some continued to protest peacefully but others began to pick up
arms to meet force with force. Neighborhood defense forces and military defectors grew
into the Free Syrian Army, a loose coalition of armed groups across the country
opposed to the Assad regime. Protests morphed into clashes and, soon enough, full-on battles.
The violence exacerbated pre-existing societal cleavages
within the country, and sectarianism grew increasingly salient. Sunnis, who represent
the majority of Syrians, became the loudest voice within the opposition. Assad,
who comes from the minority Alawite community, attracted the support of other
minority sects, including Shia and Christians, who feared Sunni intentions. Of
course, not all Sunnis support the opposition and not all minorities support
the regime – but these schisms have grown ever deeper. Kurdish Syrians have
also fought both sides as they attempt to carve out their own autonomy.
Now, radicals from all communities have drowned out
moderates. This process has been accelerated by the intervention of outside
forces that have stirred the sectarian pot. Assad has relied increasingly on
Iran and Hezbollah – both Shia who face common Sunni rivals. Meanwhile, Sunni
groups inspired by and part of al-Qaeda have joined the fight on the side of
the opposition and become some of its most powerful military forces. Gulf states, also Sunni, have contributed arms and financing to the rebels. As the war
has become more transnational, so has the risk that it’ll spill over in neighboring
Lebanon, Iraq and to a lesser extent Turkey and Jordan. Now, factions within
both the regime and the opposition speak openly of ethnic cleansing and have
committed countless war crimes.
And to be clear, Syria is a civil war. Over 100,000 people
have died in the past two years in Syria, and there is no sign the violence
will abate any time soon. One in four Syrians are now displaced from their homes. The battle has reached largely a stalemate, after a series of rebel advances were stopped and reversed earlier this year. The
opposition has secured control of much of the north and the east, near the
Turkish border. The regime has control of the south and the west, near the
Lebanon border. The capital Damascus is controlled by the regime, but the rebels control
many of the Damascus suburbs.
It is in these suburbs which the Assad regime has most recently
used chemical weapons, likely sarin gas. It is not the first time the regime
has used chemical weapons, but the scale of this attack (somewhere between 300
and 1200 dead) is unprecedented. It is the worst use of chemical weapons since
Saddam Hussein gassed Iraqi Kurds in the late 1980's. We know the regime used chemical
weapons because we intercepted regime communications talking about the attack. Still, the attack only represents a small fraction of the total people killed in the past two years, largely from small arms, shelling, and bombs.
It is not clear why Assad would use chemical weapons on this scale. The timing is also odd, because the UN had just deployed a team of chemical weapons experts to investigate previous attacks. Some experts say the attack may not have been approved from the top. Others suggest that they meant to use chemical weapons, but accidentally killed more people than they intended. What is clear, however, is Assad has been perfectly willing to kill civilians indiscriminately in a myriad of ways, and there have been little international repercussions for doing so thus far. So the fact he's willing to gas his own people is, sadly, not shocking. For what it's worth, the regime has denied responsibility and said it was the rebels who used chemical weapons.
It is not clear why Assad would use chemical weapons on this scale. The timing is also odd, because the UN had just deployed a team of chemical weapons experts to investigate previous attacks. Some experts say the attack may not have been approved from the top. Others suggest that they meant to use chemical weapons, but accidentally killed more people than they intended. What is clear, however, is Assad has been perfectly willing to kill civilians indiscriminately in a myriad of ways, and there have been little international repercussions for doing so thus far. So the fact he's willing to gas his own people is, sadly, not shocking. For what it's worth, the regime has denied responsibility and said it was the rebels who used chemical weapons.
President Obama warned Syria last year that the use of
chemical weapons was a red line that would fundamentally change our approach to
the conflict. From an early stage of the revolution, the US said Assad should
step aside to allow a political resolution. As the revolution turned violent,
the administration resisted pressure to arm the Syrian rebels, claiming that
their disunity would make it impossible to prevent arms from falling into
extremist hands. After Assad first used chemical weapons earlier this year, the
administration decided to finally arm the rebels, even though those very
extremists are even more powerful than before. No weapons have yet been
delivered in any sizable amount, but we have provided training to armed opposition
groups and likely have provided other logistical support.
Unlike the US, Russia has not hesitated to provide substantial
military and economic support to the side it supports: Assad. Russia, along
with China, has consistently stymied every move at the UN to condemn and punish
the Assad regime.
The latest chemical attack will likely push the US to
respond with military force. The goal will not be regime change like in Libya,
but to punish Assad for crossing our red line and for violating the
international norm against using chemical weapons. We will likely target a few
military installations and other key infrastructure, causing enough damage to
make it hurt but not so much to force Assad to retaliate. It is unlikely we will
risk flying our own planes over Syria, so we will instead rely on cruise
missiles.
For his part, Assad has threatened retribution against
anyone who supports a military strike by the West. Fighting for his literal survival,
it is unclear if any amount of cruise missiles will force him to abandon his
murderous path.
Our European allies, and especially Great Britain, will stand
with us politically and in a few cases militarily. Arab states seem hesitant to
provide political support, especially after a July 3 coup in Egypt removed the
pro-opposition president Mohamed Morsi. Unlike in Libya, the Security Council will not
approve any military action, because Russia and China will veto any measure
authorizing the use of force. They say it’s because they’re angry with NATO for
overstepping its mandate in Libya by taking a mandate to protect civilians and using it to overthrow the Muammar Qaddafi regime. But in reality, they just care for what they
perceive are their national interests. The US will instead look to build an ad hoc coalition to try to give our intervention the veneer of international legitimacy.
There is now little hope in Syria, and our bombs falling on
Assad targets will be lost in the noise of violence that has engulfed the
country. Even if Assad were to fall tomorrow, the violence he has unleashed
will continue for years to come. Worse, there are fewer and fewer good guys to
support as extremists take control across the political spectrum. We can only
hope to try to curb the worst excesses of violence within the country and try
and prevent it from engulfing the rest of the region.
UPDATE: I added a few lines about why Assad may have used chemical weapons.
UPDATE: I added a few lines about why Assad may have used chemical weapons.