Reflection 2

I've recently had the opportunity to go to a presentation on Russian-Iranian relations and the affect on US policy given by regional expert Mark Katz. While not a major topic of discussion, Syria was often brought up and hearing about the conflict from a different perspective gave me new eye when reading the news this week. Katz discussed how Russia and Iran,  opposing US interference and influence, believe that even if Assad is overthrown, the group that would take over would be Sunni radicals and extremists and that it would not lead to democracy ( he also asserted that Russia would rather stand behind a Assad doomed to fail in defiance of the west that side with the US). Of course, none of the countries in question are free of bias; even in Russia the conflict has become a domestic issue because of the muslim population. Still, this view reminded me of when the US got involved in another conflict only a few countries over. Of course, the US couldn't have known what the Taliban would become, right? Of course these are different circumstances, different countries, different motivations, different people. But the comparison between the two isn't lost on me.

The United Nations has convened it's GA to discuss the conflict in Syria. As predicted, no compromise has been reached. While most nations (including Russia and the US) agree that the violence done by the Syrian government must be condemned, but beyond that the Council and the Assembly cannot find common ground. Russia and China have so far used veto power on three resolutions, a pattern that hasn't been seen since the Cold War. Russia believes that it is not only the government at fault, but the opposition who must be condemned as well. The foreign minister Lavrov called the opposition terrorists, and those who support them proponents of terrorism. Such stalemates and an inability to compromise give little hope to the conflict ending any time soon. It seems to me that the P5 nations are struggling with letting go of their own agendas. In my opinion, all countries should  want the same thing: peace. However, it seems that the countries are forgetting that there is more than one way two end a war. The US seems to believe that the tens of thousands of lives lost in the conflict (30,000 and rising according to most recent reports) are worth it if there is a chance for a fair democracy in the future.  I think that it is inevitable that lives will be lost in such a fight, but when there is an 18 month stalemate, it's not absurd to question the value of continuing the fight. Especially considering that there's no guarantee the next leader will be any better than Assad. However, I do believe that the chance of a better future is worth fighting for, that fighting for your rights and the rights of your children is a noble one and one that should  be at least supported by the international community. Whether the FSA is truly in that fight, I'm not sure anymore. They've certainly considered enough atrocities and war crimes to make me question their motives. Regardless, Assad's time is over. No country can deny that his bloodthirsty dictatorship is excusable. No matter what happens next, Assad has to go. Otherwise there's no hope for the violence to stop.