Syria: Watching it Burn

Suddenly Syria is back on the agenda. This issue has been meandering in and out of the main public discourse for as long as the conflict has been going on, pushed out by various issues deemed more important to Britons. An Olympics there, deteriorating economy there a Royal baby who you would have to live on the moon to avoid news of. Things started out in the now familiar Arab Spring context. The people protested against their government and demanded more of a say in how their country is run. In response the government shot at them, over and over again. Soon the inevitable happened; the people shot back. What started as a few simmering skirmishes turned into a civil war, then slowly and surely morphed into a glimpse of a regional one. But as bad as it got it wasn't quite bad enough to discuss anything other than sending over non-lethal aid. It was certainly not bad enough in the opinion of the politicians and the people who voted them in this country and much of the West. In the wake of a shaky Eurozone and austerity measures, this additional problem came at a time decidedly inconvenient for us. It is undoubtedly immeasurably more inconvenient for the Syrian people themselves.

 

So the brain trust of our political masters had a plan. Granted it seemed hardly justifiable to act now, it simply wasn't horrible enough as defined by their humble assessments. But if Assad or the rebels used chemical weapons a "red line" would be crossed, all bets would be off and the West would race in and settle accounts. It seemed no one believed that this line would come, then it did. And the US in particular as demonstrated for Obama opted for more caution instead of more action. If chemical weapons were used, verification would have to be carried out it was reasoned. Even when verification from the UK, France and Israel among other came Obama urged caution, the US intelligence juggernaut had still not delivered its verdict. Just to make sure the world was listening the culprits pulled the same trick again almost as if to make sure we were looking. Now it is no longer in debate that chemical weapons have been used. Certainty has been restored, and the inconvenient fact that over 700,000 lives have been snuffed out with good old fashioned firearms and bombs has been put aside as a minor annoyance.

 

So the arm chair politicians and strategists, admittedly a vice I am not completely innocent of, are out in force. What is to be done? How? Who's army? The latter question is the most permanent. Conservatives and UKIP supporters in particular are out for blood thanks to the UK defence cuts making a mockery of our previous imperial power status. We are not powerless, but our power is waning. But in this we are not alone. Europe with the exception of Germany is in economic recovery mode and suffering under similar austerity measures. So no one nation is really in a position to solve this problem alone. This has to be a coalition effort. France seems keen to get involved. The US seems less so but has begun to position itself on the warpath.

 

We the UK seem as little more than an assertive and at times a little bit of a morally self righteous little country at times like this. But we are far from powerless and we still have a powerful voice. I am divided for practical reasons about what a military intervention might achieve. My pessimism is mostly down to my belief that an earlier intervention may have supported a more cohesive and less extreme rebel force. Now extremists are growing among the rebels. But for principle and long term stability's sake, I am pretty certain that President Assad has to go. But in order to bring this about there is one angle we have avoided for reasons of political expediency, leaning on Russia.

 

Assad's Syria has long been a client state of Russia. Even now despite sanctions and international condemnation Russia backs Assad, only slightly wavering at the chemical weapons. You need only look at the tone which Russia addresses the West with to know that the Putin clique does not respect us. An infamous feature of the Syrian debacle has been their Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov wagging his finger at us, urging us to stay out while Assad 'resolves' the problem. Despite the fact that such resolving seems to require an extreme amount of bloodshed. And yet what is the UK's response to Russia? There were pictures taken and handshakes given in front of No 10. Putin is feted like a statesman while he acts in the manner as anything but one. Meanwhile a Russian ship carrying arms to Syria is stuck in Scottish waters in insurance grounds, hardly a bold blow struck for freedom.

 

Germany is one of the only larger nations that have taken a harder line against Russia. Germany under Chancellor Angela Merkel has openly criticised Putin, cancelled state visits between Russia and Germany and has encouraged the growth of Russian human rights activist groups in Russia. I firmly believe that it is in the UK's interests to encourage Germany to come out of its World War Two shadow. The decline of European hard power thanks to defence cuts means a more assertive Germany has a place in the world. I hope one day Germany will be as keen to commit to interventions such as Syria as much as France is.

But today is Friday 29th August 2013, the day after the House of Commons vote on Syria. The government has been defeated, meaning that the UK will militarily at least sit this one out. Many people are happy about this, including many friends of mine. For myself I could not be more disappointed. As far as I am concerned Labour has done the "right thing" to exorcise the demons left from the Iraq debacle more than anything. Ed Miliband is now spoken of very disingenuously as a statesman. And now the UK will sit by and do nothing, while the unlikely alliance of France and the US may take the lead instead.

 

My anti-war friends tell me that this is good news. We aren't going to kill anyone. No imperialist solutions etc. Despite what I believe, for better or worse they have their way now. Maybe future events will prove that this fight will resolve itself before too much more suffering befalls the Syrian people. However I would like my friends to consider this; if you were the Syrian rebels, after your victory over Assad, would you come to the UK's aid if they were in need?