It is one thing to provide humanitarian aid to the suffering Syrian
people (although that is hardly an easy task to accomplish, as
praiseworthy as it may be), but it is a grave mistake for America to
attempt to get involved in the military conflict. There is hardly a
“lesser of two evils” to side with there.
On the one hand, we know that President Bashar Assad has continued in
his father’s tyrannous and murderous footsteps, with the blood of tens
of thousands of his people already on his head. In fact, some of the
bloodshed has taken place in the very same locations, with Hafez Assad
being responsible for the 1982 massacre in Hama that took the lives of
between 10,000-40,000 Syrians, while in 2012, Bashar Assad’s troops
slaughtered scores of insurgents in the same city.
And there is no doubt that the reports of wholesale torture,
imprisonment, rape, and murder of men, women, and children by Assad’s
forces are largely accurate. (Can you imagine what the world outrage
would be if the government of Israel engaged in atrocities 1/100th this
severe?)
It is understandable, then, that we feel the need to take action against the Assad regime.
But what would happen if Assad was toppled? And if we stand against
Assad, who are we standing with? (Sarah Palin’s recent quip at the Faith
and Freedom Conference, “Let Allah sort it out” – meaning, until we
have strong leadership in the White House, we should keep our hands out
of Syria – is actually somewhat apropos.)
We have witnessed the slaughter and/or exodus of hundreds of
thousands of Iraqi Christians since the fall of Saddam Hussein, an
eventuality that the Bush administration apparently gave little thought
to, while the persecution of Coptic Christians in Egypt under the Muslim
Brotherhood continues to rise. (The mass exodus of Christians from the
Muslim Middle East is well-documented, even if underreported.)
In the same way, there is good evidence that the fall of Assad would
open the door to the massacre of the Christian population of Syria, with
reports of 300,000 Christians already fleeing the country. Does America
want to be party to this? Have we learned our lessons from Iraq? (This
is not to say that the war was wrong but rather that we failed to think
through the implications of our actions.) Have we learned our lessons
from Egypt, where the “Arab Spring” quickly became a “Sharia Fall”?
We helped fund and arm the Mujahedeen in their battle for liberation
against Russia in Afghanistan, the end result being that one
fundamentalist Islamic movement – meaning, the Mujahedeen, militant
Muslim freedom fighters – came into power, only to be displaced by an
even more militant Islamic movement (the Taliban). In the eyes of
fundamentalist Islam, America may be a useful ally, but ultimately,
America is the enemy. What lessons have we learned from this?
There are even some who claim that “the Taliban — and al-Qaeda — were
[created] by the CIA in league with Pakistani and Saudi Arabian
intelligence.” If true, should we learn something from this?
In recent days, there have been reports of atrocities committed by
the Syrian “rebels” in the name of Islam, including the execution of a
14-year-old boy for insulting Mohammed, while YouTube videos show
government troops being shot in the head by the “rebels” as others chant
“Allahu Akbar”! (I put “rebels” in quotes because calling them “rebels”
only tells part of the story.)
On Sunday, June 16th, Russian President Vladimir Putin warned the
West “against arming Syrian rebels ‘who kill their enemies and eat their
organs,’ referencing a widely circulated video that purports to show a
rebel fighter eating the heart of a dead soldier,” while at the same
time, the Assad government is being aided by the Lebanese-based
terrorist organization Hezbollah, and Iran has promised to send several
thousand troops to Assad’s aid.
And that is only the tip of the iceberg, as a June 3rd AP report
notes that, “The Syrian conflict, now in its third year, has taken on
dark sectarian overtones. Predominantly Sunni rebels backed by Sunni
states Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey are fighting against a regime that
relies on support from Alawites and Shiites at home, and is aided by
Iran and Hezbollah. The Syria conflict is also part of a wider battle
between Saudi Arabia and Iran for regional influence. Sunni fighters
from Iraq and Lebanon have crossed into Syria to help those fighting
Assad, while Shiites from Iraq have joined the battle on the regime’s
side.”
Then, of course, there are the implications for the safety of Israel
in the case of either an Assad victory or an Assad defeat, the former
assuring Syria’s ongoing cooperation with Hezbollah and Iran, the latter
assuring the rise of a more militant Islamic regime to Israel’s north,
with dangerous implications for Lebanon as well.
In light of these realities, and in light of our government’s failure
to exercise more foresight in dealing with the Muslim world, we do best
at this point to avoid military involvement in Syria while doing our
best to provide humanitarian aid to the suffering country and looking
for ways to help end the bloodshed. But short term or long, we should
not delude ourselves: This is a hornet’s nest.
No comments:
Post a Comment