Categories
International News

International // Syria Strikes Inspire Strife

For the past seven years, Syria has experienced war and conflict. The latest event in this unfolding catastrophe occurred last week, when the United States led airstrikes against the regime of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad.

These strikes were conducted with the intent of destroying the government’s chemical weapons facilities after Assad allegedly used chemical weapons on Syrian civilians, according to The Washington Post. After three sites in Syria were attacked, President Trump announced, “Mission accomplished!” in a tweet, but the situation remains volatile.

a photo of the authorAlthough the war in Syria began in 2011, the BBC reported that even before the conflict in Syria escalated, “many Syrians were complaining about high unemployment, officials not behaving as they should do, and a lack of political freedom.” In 2011, Syrians living in the city of Deraa began peaceful protests after 15 schoolchildren were taken captive for writing anti-government graffiti on a wall. Assad’s army opened fire on protesters, killing several people, according to the BBC. Outrage over this incident caused unrest to spread over the country, and many Syrian citizens called for Assad’s resignation. He refused, causing a violent rift to grow between Assad’s supporters and detractors. By 2012, the Red Cross described the situation as a civil war.

The people rebelling against Assad do not necessarily share a common vision for Syria, since there is not “one single group” of rebels, the BBC said. The rebels’ key international support comes from the United States, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia. As evidenced by their support for the recent U.S. airstrikes, the U.K. and France also support more moderate rebels.

In 2013, an extremist group that calls itself the Islamic State began to gain a foothold in Syria. This group is opposed to Assad but separate from other rebel groups. To counter the Islamic State, the United States launched previous airstrikes and currently has 2,000 armed forces members deployed.

Russia and Iran provide support for Assad’s government, and last week Russia backed up Assad’s claim that he had not used chemical weapons on civilians. Many worry that the United States may risk escalating tensions with Russia by attacking Assad’s regime.

The United Nations Security Council gathered after the strike to debate whether Assad’s government had used chemical weapons. The debate revealed bitter tensions. United Nations secretary general Antonio Guterres said, “the Cold War is back with a vengeance.” The New York Times noted that Guterres condemned the use of chemical weapons and lamented the Security Council’s failure to resolve the conflicts in Syria, which he called “the most serious threat to international peace and security.”

Russia’s ambassador, Vasily Nebenzia, said during the Security Council debate that the United States’ decision to conduct airstrikes was an act of aggression against a state “on the front lines of the fight against terrorism.” Nebenzia said he believes the United States acted with “blatant disrespect for international law.”

Others have suggested that President Trump’s authorization of the strike was unconstitutional. In an article for The Atlantic, Garrett Epps argues “under the Constitution and the War Powers Act, the president has no authority to send military forces into hostilities except after congressional authorization or in response to a direct attack on the U.S. or its forces.” This would suggest that even in a pressing situation, the United States must maintain transparency with its people about war aims.

The American ambassador, Nikki Haley, argued that the recent intervention in Syria was “justified, legitimate, and proportionate.” Haley said the United States “gave diplomacy chance after chance after chance,” only to have these efforts blocked by Russia. She said, “when our president draws a red line, he enforces that red line.”

For average Syrian people, an anti-government activist said, “the American strikes did not change anything.” Seven years of conflict has seen Syria “sliced up by world powers,” The New York Times reported, and some now argue that the only realistic way to halt the war is “to acknowledge that Mr. Assad…will remain in power.” Though many desire to punish Assad for his brutal actions in the war, Joshua Landis, an expert on Middle East Studies at University of Oklahoma, said he believes punitive measures will make life worse for average Syrians and impede efforts to address the country’s sizable issues.

 

Sarah is a senior double majoring in English and Biology.