Will Russia’s Unilateral Decision on Syria Pull in the US?

Source, Aljazeera

With over 4 million people having fled their country, and close to 8 million people internally

displaced, the Syrian Crisis is one of the worst crises in recent memory. We have not seen a coherent American leadership on the crisis. The blame for that has been directed at Obama and his administration for lack of leadership and forceful intervention. In hindsight, it might seem clear the US should have gotten involved during the earlier stage of the conflict. But Obama truly believes in diplomacy and got elected emphasizing on the importance of soft power.

There are three main reasons why the US didn’t intervene forcefully from the onset.  

1. Majority of Americans had lost appetite of leading global wars

2. US has limited national interests in Syria (mainly containing Iran’s influence in the region)

3. Fear of a power vacuum in Syria.

Ousting Assad is also risking of turning the country into ISIS and Al-Qaida’s playground. As one writer noted, “…toppling Assad will mean a victory for jihadists. So better to let both sides bleed for as long as possible, turning Syria into Iran's Vietnam.”

Some may say, what about the humanitarian aspect of the Syrian people? Sure, that is a worthy cause of intervention, but that would be acting on morality. And, let Us not kid ourselves; morality does not govern Washington politicians. If moral values were of consideration, Guantanamo would have been their first stop. Where at least “53 men have been recommended for release by high-level governmental review processes” at the prison. Yet, they are still held in imprisonment of which some of them have been there for over a decade.

Meanwhile, Russia’s bold and shrewd strategist President Putin is coming out as the man with the plan to save the Assad regime against America and its allies wishes. Now, Russia’s latest unilateral decision to bomb the various anti government forces in Syria will likely force the US to reevaluate its resistance to get involve in the conflict in an impactful way.  

Cheers,

Daniel