What's happening Syria and what does it reveal about military intervention?

Credit: UNRWA

Syria has routinely made the headlines - not only for the severe ramifications on the society and the Arabian Peninsula, but because it has drawn in so many foreign powers to participate in what was once a civil war in the region. As of now, estimates suggest that 380,000 Syrian civilians have died as a result of the conflict, and many more have displaced to neighboring regions, such as Lebanon.

Understanding the cause of the conflict and effects of society is important , but it is also extremely crucial to analyze how global institutions like the United Nations have failed, as well as why military intervention and hard power is no longer an appropriate method to conflicts around the world.

The History 

The Arab Spring was a series of pro-democracy social movements all over the Arabian Peninsula, originating in Tunisia and spreading to countries such as Morocco and Egypt. Syrian civilians had been heavily displeased by the lack of progress that Bashar Al Assad's government had made on economic and politics reforms. Using the Arab Spring as a catalyst, civilians launched movements to demand reforms and express their displeasure with Syria's current state. However, the government and military's response drew international condemnation - protestors were beaten and killed as Bashar hoped to quell any rebellion in his state.

Thus began a civil war between the government and civilians, each hoping to gain some traction and win the war for power. The usage of chemical weapons by Bashar al Assad marked the beginning of foreign intervention, where USA and their allies provided military support to fight against Islamic State and the government, and Russia, China and Iran extended military support towards Al Assad's regime.

In the meanwhile, many criticized the United Nations for its lack of effort towards any diplomatic measures. In the United Nations Security Council, the consistent use of veto by Russia and China prevented the Security Council to make any joint efforts to stopping this civil war. This points towards a greater flaw in the institution, where hegemony/power given to the P5 nations prevents chances for peace.

The Opinions

Supporters - Supporters of the military intervention believe that it was just - since there was no alternative due to the Russia and China's veto. Western Coalition countries such as USA and UK were able to prevent the continued use of chemical weapon against civilians and the uprising of Islamic State in the region through using their military power.

Critics - Critics of the military intervention believe that there were other methods for the states to approach peace for the region, rather than using brute force. They cite the numerous failed attempts at a National Dialogue and Peace Conference as justification, and rather believe that intervention was done to consolidate foreign influence in the Arab region rather than end the civil war.

The Answer

The Syrian Civil War provides us insight into why there is mass violence in the Arab region, as well as why terrorist organizations such as the Islamic State slowly rose to power. However, on a larger scale, it points to the weaknesses and failures of peace institutions such as the United Nations Security Council - such as how certain nations can utilize their power for personal benefit at the expense of global peace.

Military intervention never seems to be the answer to conflict. We see this with Syria, where mass civilian casualties have been accumulated and the country perpetually remains in conflict and destruction. Reaching, or attempting, a diplomatic solution is far more powerful in contemporary politics.