This week is the third anniversary of the Syrian protests that now have become a civil war. What was a peaceful protest was pushed into armed rebellion by the Syrian government shooting protesters and demolishing neighborhoods. Another Syrian general defected this week and the French and English governments have said that they may supply arms to the rebels even without the rest of the European Union. Assad’s allies, mainly Russia and Iran, keep the government supplied with all kinds of advanced weapons. The rebels get their arms from defectors, the black market, Turkish smugglers, radical groups and Saudi middlemen. The regime even has Hesbollah fighters supporting it. Still, the rebels now control much of the north and east, outside of the main cities. They also have some control of some neighborhoods, and pockets of fighting have popped up everywhere. Nowhere is peaceful and 70,000 are estimated dead, and over a million refugees have fled the country.
Should the U.S. supply weapons? Our government is concerned about being in still another Middle East war. Sitting out on supplying arms, at least directly, is our policy. The U.S. and Israel are concerned about biological weapons falling into extremist hands. International recognition at least backs the rebels, and it is hard to believe that Assad can govern Syria. The best option would be for a no-fly zone, protected by the West, and allowing the rebels to hold much of the country. Many refugees and many deaths have been from the Syrian air force, which we could stop in a matter of weeks. No matter what, there will be more casualties. But, better to bring this to an end, sooner, and not after two more years.
No comments:
Post a Comment