Khalid 1 Anwar Khalid Mr.

Calonne ENGL 121 11 December, 2013 The Syrian Conflict The Syrian revolution is one of the deadliest revolutions that have been since the start of the so called Arab spring. I was born and raised in Baghdad, Iraq, which gives me a wider understanding than many people who have never lived in, or even visited, the middle-east; let alone having lived in a war-torn environment. Yet, most people living outside Syria, whether they are pro or anti foreign involvement, do not really understand what is going on. Therefore, it is important to explore both sides of the war to give a better understanding of the politics that goes behind. In 2010, the Middle-East experienced events that have never occurred in its history: a loud wave against oppression of governments and dictators. These events, which are collectively labeled Arab Spring, started in Tunisia where a young man burned himself to death to protest how the police were treating him. Starting in Tunisia, protests against the governments of the Middle-East arose across the countries right after that incident. So far, the revolution in Syria has been the deadliest; therefore, the worlds leaders gathered around to discuss whether to involve in Syria or not. To this day, Barack Obama has been the only leader to really push towards an outside involvement in Syria. How will the U.S. benefit from the involvement in Syria? The Jerusalem post, Israels most followed and trusted news media, reports that by the United States involving in Syria, the U.S. government would follow up on its commitment to Israel. This will end the fear of chemical

Khalid 2 attacks on Israel due to the fact that the U.S. will have a hand in charge regarding who would be running Syria after Al-Assads regime ends (Solomon). Syria is considered an important center piece in the Middle Eastern geography, and a certain benefit for the U.S. government involvement would be establishing stability in Syria. This, in turn, would cause stability in the entire region and make it a little safer for Americas biggest ally in the Middle East, Israel. Making Israel safer will give the United States government one less problem in the world to worry about. On the other hand, another question forms, how would Syria benefit from the United States involving in its affairs. The rebels in Syria are a big group of former Syrian soldiers, who separated from the army to fight against the government along with civilians who joined in for the cause. In addition to that, part of the rebel group in Syria is members and leaders that have been linked to Al-Qaeda (Shoichet). There many rebel groups in Syria, the biggest is the Free Syrian Army, and all have same goal of taking down Bashar Al-Assad and establishing democracy. If the United States involves in the Syrian conflict, it would be in the form of an air strike that, according to President Obamas Address to the Nation in 2013, would achieve a clear objective, deterring the use of chemical weapons and degrading Assads capabilities, (Obama). Since those rebels are anti Al-Assads regime, and are promising democracy, the United States will be benefiting Syria and the Syrian people by helping them defeat the regime. Also, since the U.S. government and high ranking U.S. military leaders strongly believe that the chemical attacks that took lives of many civilians were done by Al-Assads regime, the United States government believes the one action to take regarding Syria is to involve and remove Al-Assad

Khalid 3 from the government. By taking down Al-Assad, and removing his government appointed officials, it would be beneficial to the Syrian people. However, this could lead to another Iraq. If the United States does indeed intervene and help the rebels take over the government, will those rebels actually bring democracy to the Syrian people. It also could bring, once again, a tyrannical form of government. As mentioned earlier, those rebels groups have Al-Qaeda linked members, and al Al-Qaedas agenda is to govern Syria under Sharia Law, which is the Islamic law. Sharia Law is mostly followed by Sunni Muslims and therefore ruling Syria under an Islamic law wouldnt be fair to all the Syrian people, since Syria has a very religiously diverse population, which includes Shia and Sunni Muslims and their sects, as well as Christians and small populations of Jewish people. Al-Qaeda linked members and their agenda of ruling Syria under the Sharia law has already showed it true colors, because thus far into the revolution, rebel groups have taken over Christian villages, burned down ancient churches as well as killed and imprisoned civilians that did not agree with their political and religious viewpoint (Sinjab). While Daily mail, reported in the town of Azaz, Al-Qaeda members that came from Iraq, have imprisoned about 60 citizens and bribed the people to change their town into an Islamic state (Mackenzie). If the rebels succeed to take control of the government after Al-Assads regime, Al-Qaeda could take over and control the country and pose a bigger threat to the Syrian people than Al-Assads current threat. Then again, those rebels could easily take over the government after the United States had intervened, and start a democratic election for a leader that would be tolerant of different political views and Syria could be a free and democratic country, much like Egypt. On the other hand, leaving Syria to resolve its own conflict could result in Al-Assad wining against the rebels. This, could have two possibilities: either Al-Assad would become a

Khalid 4 more brutal president that would use the defeat of the rebels as a statement to anyone who is trying to revolt against his regime (just like how his father did long time ago), or Al-Assad could actually become reformed president that would allow free speech and democracy to prevent such revolution from ever happening again by winning peoples vote instead of taking it by force. However, to understand Bashar, we have to understand his history a little bit. Bashar Al-Assad is a very educated person, on the other hand, he isnt educated in politics but instead he has a medical degree from University of Damascus. Bashar, however, did travel to the London to further his education at the Western Eye Hospital (Rafizadeh). Al-Assad started his presidency after his fathers death. Bashar was never really intended to rule Syria, as he always stayed in the shadows of his older brother. However, after Bashars brother accidental death and the death of his father, he was forced to stop his education and come back to Syria and become the president. For a short period of time, Bashar, with his western viewpoint on life and experiencing true democracy at first hand, started his presidency allowing free speech and debate about the government. Still, at the first sign of rebellion he prosecuted people that were thinking of reforming the government and Al-Assads Baath party. Thus, such a violent revolution might force Al-Assad to open up for political debate and democracy due to the fear that he or his family could be killed, if Bashar did not respond to the peoples need. Much like how Libyas president was beaten to death and his sons were killed by the Libyan people, Al-Assads could face the same outcome. The prospect of the U.S. intervention in Syria can be compared back to the invasion of Iraq in March of 2003, since Iraq and Syria share similar political polices and even same party agenda and party name. Iraq did not have a civil war, however, after the invasion a civil war broke out over which majority should govern the country. This scenario could easily play over in

Khalid 5 Syria. If the United States intervenes by striking strategic locations and destroying the government's stronghold. Doing so, could result in a country without any leadership and law. Therefore, just like in Iraq, the United States will be forced to place soldiers on the ground to basic stability to reform the country. Doing such intervention will cost trillions of dollars, will contain many problems and complications, and will take well over a decade to establish a real democracy in a country with instability and diverse population, much like in Iraq. Because simply the United States wouldnt be able to just strike, destroy the government, and leave the country in rebels hands without a real leader, or even worse Syria could fall under the control of Al-Qaeda due to its Sunni Muslims majority. Al-Qaeda could easily influence the people, and it could cause Syria to become a real threat to Iraq, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and all countries around Syria. If the United States places soldiers on Syrian grounds, could the government actually afford another war? So far, the United States is still struggling with its economy and it is in the process of recovering from the decade long war in Iraq, and the ongoing war in Afghanistan. As well as the fact that the United States is in trillions in debt. Americas biggest superpower ally, Great Britain, has declared that it will not involve in the Syrian conflict (Rezaei). Not only Great Britain, but France and other allies have stepped aside on the Syrian conflict. Consequently, leaving the United States to intervene alone. And it does not take much looking around and research to see that many people in America arent ready, and wouldnt approve in a war that does not place a threat to the American freedom. Sadly, while we explore these options, innocent Syrian civilians are dying everyday. So far, not a single day has passed without a huge number of people getting killed in Syria, building up an average of over three thousand people every month for the past two years (By the

Khalid 6 numbers: Syria deaths, 2013). While the worlds superpower governments might not actually be quite about it, the people around the world, especially in America, do not fully understand or even follow the tragic events that are going on in Syria. Currently, according to the United Nation's news website, Syria is cooperating with the United Nations to resolve its chemical weapons (Oct. 2013). The chemical attacks have killed many people since the revolution, and the number of deaths is on the rise. Intervening might cause that number to go up, because the Syrian regime will do whatever it can in its power to stay in power. Much like the Iraqi regime and Saddam Hussein, the number of deaths will rise due to simply people getting caught in the crossfire of political games. After the much of research that I have conducted, and looking at my history and to where I grew up during the so called Iraqi Freedom war. Syrian people will fight hard and die for their freedom. Just like in Libya, Tunisia, and Egypt, Syrian people have a strong will fight for their freedom. Because, so far, Iraq is the only country in the Middle East that had reformed government by outside help and is still unstable with bombs and assassinations occurring every day. Thus, Syria could face the same issues if the west intervenes.

Khalid 7 Works Cited Cowell, A. "U.N. Investigates More Alleged Chemical Attacks in Syria." Www.nytimes.com. New York Times, n.d. Web. 8 Dec. 2013. Dominiczak, P. "David Cameron Rules out Any Future Military Action in Syria."Www.telegraph.co.uk. The Telegraph, n.d. Web. 8 Dec. 2013. Obama, B. "President Obama's Sept. 10 Speech on Syria." Www.washingtonpost.com. Washington Post, n.d. Web. 8 Dec. 2013. Rezaei. "Britain Will Not Join USA in Strike on Syria." Www.usatoday.com. USA Today, n.d. Web. 8 Dec. 2013. Rafizadeh, Majid. "How Bashar Al-Assad Took Syria to the Brink, and Beyond."Www.cnn.com. CNN, n.d. Web. 6 Dec. 2013. Solomon, A. "Syrian Civil War Spreads to Lebanese City of Tripoli." Www.cnn.com. CNN, n.d. Web. 6 Dec. 2013. Sinjab, L. "Christian Villagers Cast Doubt on Syrian Jihadist "threat."" Www.bbc.com. BBC, n.d. Web. 7 Dec. 2013.