By Keil Myers
The United States has exhibited some hesitancy to support the opposition to the Assad regime in the Syria civil war. One reason for this lukewarm support is most likely due to the composition of the major Syrian rebel groups where they almost all have ties to Muslim extremist organizations such as Al-Qaeda. In Addition to this opposition groups have been shown to commit various human rights abuses. Such items understandably make the United States less willing to fully commit to assisting these groups for fear of merely replacing one problem with another potentially larger one. Nevertheless, such reluctance is leading to exactly what the United States fears and further intervention is required in order to limit the damage that this war will cause. There are several major opposition groups with some of the larger ones including the Free Syria Army which is a group primarily made up of military deserters along with multiple smaller militias note under the direct control of the main FSA. These groups have been indicted of human rights violations with the most recent case being in the last month where a video was taken of a FSA commander eating the heart of a dead Syrian soldier. Along with this the FSA has worked with groups such as Al Nusra, a group that has sworn allegiance to Al-Qaeda such ties have made the United States somewhat reluctant to become heavily involved with opposition groups like the FSA. However, with the more than the reluctant support that the United States has displayed the FSA could potentially strengthen its control of the groups and individuals currently outside of its control.
The next largest opposition group to the Assad regime is the Syrian Nation Council. This group was, until recently, widely considered the voice of the Syrian people. The SNC is a loose coalition of representatives from various groups with the organization itself based in Turkey. However, the United States was hesitant to trust the SNC due to its heavy ties with the Muslim Brotherhood with many in Syria itself seeing the SNC as
a front for the organization and one member of the council claimed that the majority of the members of the council were Muslim extremists. Ties with the Muslim Brotherhood and other extremist groups have made the United States and other western nations less willing to assist the SNC and why they chose to merge with the Syrian National Coalition.
Formed in 2012 in order to provide a more inclusive government than the Syrian National Coalition is the largest opposition group has been generally recognized as the legitimate government of the Syrian people. The National Coalition consists of a larger number of groups including members of the Syrian National Council, the Free Syria Army, various local committees, as well as other religious and secular groups. While not all of these groups have ties to extremist Islam many of them do. Nevertheless, the majority of the coalition is made up of individuals and groups that would be willing to moderate their position as the situation required and they deserve more than the weak support that the United States has provided so far.
So while the United States reluctance to support the rebel groups is understandable as things stand not intervening in Syria is more likely to cause more damage than intervening. In the last few weeks reports from Washington and the United Nations Security Council has stated that they are almost certain that members of the Assad regime have employed chemical weapons on the rebels. Last year President Obama proclaimed that the use of chemical weapons was the red line, which if crossed would prompt a response from the United States. Use of these weapons is unethical and their use should prompt the United States to abandon its reluctance to assist the rebels in order to limit the collateral damage to civilians. In addition to this such actions would serve to let the world know that the use of weapons of mass destruction will not be tolerated.
In addition to this, the United States reluctance to help the rebels is helping to radicalize the revolution in Syria. Similar to Ho Chi Minh and other revolutionaries the rebels in Syria and willing to adopt the philosophies and attitudes of those who are willing to help them in their revolution and as a result the number of Islamic radicals in the opposition is growing. For instance, The Economist recently reported that due to the western world's hesitancy to support the opposition, members of the opposition haveturned to Islamist groups for support. This support has led to those who are more extreme to become more powerful and to have greater influence in the revolution. This radicalization has made the made increased involvement distasteful to western governments leading to moderate politics to enter a death spiral in the opposition. The United States should shed its reluctance to assist the rebels in order to ingratiate itself to the rebels and increase the influence of voices favorable to the United States in the coming government.
The United States reluctance to increase its involvement with the Syrian is understandable considering the most of the opposition may be worse than the Assad regime. Their hesitance has driven the opposition towards greater radicalization and weakened the moderates in the opposition. Nevertheless in the face of the increasing radicalization and the use of chemical weapons the United States should forgo their fears and become further involved in supporting the Syrian opposition in order to limit the damage of this civil war to the Syrian people as well as the spread of Islamic radicalism in the Middle East.
Here’s a brief summary of the different rebel factions in case anyone is interested.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15798218
