Pragmatic solutions for Syria's crisis are hindered due to moral considerations.
In the heart of the Middle East, the Syrian conflict has been a persistent and devastating ordeal, lasting over a decade. The Syrian state, an artificial construct created after World War I by the United Kingdom and France, is home to a mosaic of communities.
The conflict, which erupted in 2011, has resulted in the displacement of a third of the country's population and caused hundreds of thousands of deaths. Idlib, currently held by the radical Islamist group, the al-Nusra Front – with roots in al-Qaeda – remains outside regime control.
The war's origins can be traced back to the uprising against the Bashar al-Assad regime, which was excluded from peace negotiations in 2011 and 2012. During this period, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar played moderating roles, while the UN and Western governments, particularly Washington and Paris, made mistakes, such as calling for negotiations that excluded the Assad government.
The deposed Syrian president fled to Moscow, while the Iranian regime, now much weaker, potentially allowing for Washington and Riyadh to exert influence. The Syrian conflict has evolved through various phases, involving internal factions, foreign actors, and regional powers such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Russia.
In 2023, President Assad, backed by Moscow and Tehran, appeared to have reestablished control over most of Syria, with Idlib and other regions remaining outside regime control. However, violence flared in the northwest, where many Alawites still loyal to former President Assad reside.
In late 2024, al-Nusra, in coalition with other opposition groups and backed by Turkiye, managed to rout the Assad army within days. This victory was made easier by Moscow and Tehran shifting their attention to other priorities.
The conflict has also led to millions of refugees fleeing to neighboring countries and some eventually reaching Europe. Kurdish forces in Syria, who fought ISIS, received support from Washington, creating further friction between Turkiye and the U.S.
Recent attacks on the Druze have prompted an Israeli intervention. The ICC's involvement in the Syrian conflict was especially counterproductive, cornering the Damascus regime and leaving it with nothing to lose. In response, Mr. Sharaa, the interim president, pledged to show tolerance toward Syria's many religious and ethnic communities.
Riyadh, especially, may be able to play a moderating role in the Syrian conflict, given the current government in Syria cannot be considered impartial. However, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his government remain opposed to President Assad, largely due to concerns about Kurdish militancy in northern Syria.
As the Syrian conflict continues, the international community must seek a peaceful resolution, acknowledging the complexities and intricacies of the situation, and avoiding the mistakes of the past.
Read also:
- Tobacco industry's suggested changes on a legislative modification are disregarded by health journalists
- Trump's Policies: Tariffs, AI, Surveillance, and Possible Martial Law
- Uncovering Political Ad Transparency: A Guide to Investigating opponent's Political Advertisements in the Digital Realm
- Elon Musk praises JD Vance's debate performance against Tim Walz
