Political Crisis in Syria
The War in Syria is often referred to as the worst humanitarian crisis in the world. So far, 11 million people have died and more are definitely on the list. Many of the victims had to flee from their country and left with no means for living. Some are still struggling to survive within their homeland country. The presented essay aims to explore the political footprints in this crisis since it is considered that the political crisis has been the main reason for such events in this country.
The Political Roots of the Conflict
The conflict has emerged out of the demonstrations that have been carried against the government. They began in March 2011 as a part of the Arab Spring movement that has captured the region. The government has failed to have a dialogue with the protesters and eventually the military forces beat the latter severally. Having survived the attack, protests that started as peaceful turned in being the bloodiest ones. Thousands of people joined the movements.
Later on, the army defectors organized forces alternative to the official Syrian army and recruited the Syrians who were ready to take arms and join the opposition movements.
Few details are to be specifically stressed in relation to the short account of the events that have eventually led to such a humanitarian catastrophe. The President of Syria had manipulated with the feelings and expectations of his citizens proceeding the conflict for the few years. He also managed to silence the protests and to present himself in the positive light while cooperating with his Western partners. After the escalation of the conflict, Bashar al-Assad employed the methods and tools inherent for the authoritarian leadership. He aimed to stop the rebellions with the help of force and weapons.
However, in this situation, as a politician who is expected to have a foresight, Bashar al-Assad should be blamed for the inability to analyze the situation that has actually covered the region. Indeed, he was quite successful at manipulating with the Western partners and public opinion. Yet, at that moment, the rebels had one more asset that played in their favor: the motivation. Thousands of people were aware of the revolutionary spirit that caught the region and helped to overthrow the dictators that ruled the countries for decades of years. Being vaccinated with this virus of freedom and democracy, the weakest Syrian opposition was revitalized with the new supporters of the new order of things in the country. Considering this, the President of Syria should definitely bear the political responsibility for the crisis.
On the other hand, the Syrian opposition should also be in part responsible for the conflict that was emerging (Lesch, 2012). Instead of finding the compromise and avoiding the bloody confrontations, it in fact recruited the opponents to the official authorities and urged them to be even more persistent in their requirements addressed to the President of Syria (Charap & Sharipo, 2016). Moreover, the Civil War that then outbreak in Syria was partially caused by the opposition too. At the beginning of the conflict, the country was torn by the representatives of the different religious formations the relations among which got worse at the time of the conflict. The civilians who at first just protested against the official government started to join these formations and fight one with another.
The Interventions of the International Community
At the certain point of the War, it was obvious that the powers of the parties were relatively similar so that none could inflict the defeat of another. Bearing that in mind, the international community being represented by the highest officials of the states, the international organizations, decided to step in to resolve the conflict and prevent the humanitarian crisis the consequences of which echoed far longer than in Syria or neighboring states. Therefore, U.N. Security Council has brought the call for the following of the 2012 Geneva Communique that provided for the establishment of the transitional governing body that would fully exercise the powers of the reconciliation agency that would be mutually recognized by the parties to the conflict (Hof & Simon, 2013).
However, the conversations initiated in 2014 broke after the two consecutive rounds due to the inability of the parties to the conflict to communicate over the creation of the agency and other issues relating to the war. Again, the Syrian government refused to take into consideration the arguments of the Syrian opposition.
Nevertheless, the conversations and round-tables eventually resulted in the series of the local ceasefires. Yet, the initiative regarding these ceasefires was coming from the official government of the Syria. It also offered to establish the freeze zone in Aleppo. Yet, these plans were destroyed. At the same time, siege lasting for three years in a suburb of al-Wair was successfully implemented.
However, soon after that, the tensions with the U.S. provided the fresh impetus for the search of the political decision for the situation in Syria. The U.S. and Russia, as the states most interested in the resolution of the conflict, sent their representatives to discuss the Security Council-endorsed road map for peace (Blanchard, Humud & Nikitin, 2015).
The short analysis of these actions of the international community also lets one suggest the following conclusions. First of all, the situation in Syria and other states that are currently experiencing the proxy wars, civil wars, tensions, conflicts, etc. explicit the total inability of the collective security systems to deal with the security related challenges. The round tables that have been held with the attendance of the highest representatives of the states and international organizations actually led to nothing. From the pragmatic point of view, they were very ineffective since the expenses that were made to gather all those officials were not paid off at the end.
Secondly, this situation also raises the questions of the international political responsibilities. As it is noted in the last sentence of the short historical record, the U.S. and Russia definitely intervene in the inner affairs of Syria with the purpose of setting the peace on this territory. The reasons for these initiatives are silenced, however, one might suppose that if needed, these states would definitely refer to the issues of peace and stability in the entire world. Yet, one might suppose that such an active role in the conversations regarding Syria might be caused by the economic interests each of the two countries have in regard to the Syrian territory and resources. However, considering the political responsibility of these two super states, they definitely have to step in and try to influence certain decisions of the Syrian government to save the lives of its citizens.
On the other hand, the inability of the international community to provide an efficient response to the conflict as well the solution of it also proves the thesis that the responsibility for resolving it remains with the official government of the country and with the opposition. As it has been stressed, the ceasefire was enabled due to the actions of the Syrian government. The similar alternatives initiated by the international community were ineffective. At the same time, it should be stressed that the conflicts tend to range from the country to the country and, perhaps, the international security organizations should focus more on the generating of the solutions that might fit in to the countries of the specific region (The Center for the Prevention of Genocide, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, 2015). The once-tailored decision providing for the establishment of the transitional government definitely cannot fit all the scenarios of the conflicts going on in the different countries in the world. The solution offered by the international community actually provided for the deprivation of the political power of the more or less legitimately appointed government of the state (Blanchard, Humud & Nikitin, 2015). And such a decision basically corresponded to the expectations of the rebellions and opposition who was willing to overthrow the government and its leader. Perhaps, the main reason for the ineffectiveness of this panacea was actually hidden in this presumption.
The Proxy War and Political Consequences
Many political experts also suggest that the rebellions in Syria that have been started just as another continuation of the Arab Spring movement has led to the brutal proxy war supported by many non-identified players. At first, the Russian government in cooperation with Iran have contributed to the promotion of President Assad and his government. The Tehran government is believed to spend thousands of million to support and promote Assad within Syria. More than that, it provides him with the military support and subsidies weapons as well as oil credits and transfers. At the same time, the Russian Federation did the cleaning meaning that it launched a series of the air attack to weaken the supporters of the Syrian opposition (Hof & Simon, 2013).
Apart from that, the Syrian government is also supported by the Lebanon, the fighters of which provided the support in the battlefield.
In addition, of course, the Syrian opposition assumed the support from the countries that actually oppose to the supporters of the Syrian government. The list of them includes the Saudi Arabia, the Turkey, the U.S., U.K. etc. In particular, the U.S. program helped the opposition to train 5.000 rebels.
Reflecting on this, it should be stressed that the war in Syria definitely involves many players inside and outside the country. Moreover, the involvement of the foreign countries into the conflict definitely testifies about the long lasting character of the conflict. It seems that all the parties are currently interested in the preservation of the status quo.
In conclusion, the situation in Syria is definitely multidimensional in the political perspective. The conflict that has been lasting for years and seems to be supported by all the parties and their outside supporters will definitely not be resolved with a help of the traditional means for dealing with the conflicts in this region. Moreover, the situation is getting worse due to the mix of the ingredients that are particular for this war including the religion, civil war, the tensions between the government and the opposition, the involvement of the foreign countries etc. Under such conditions, it is definitely hard to determine those politically responsible for the situation. Moreover, the solution is definitely out of the reach.