Should the Outside World Intervene to Help the Victims of Violence In Syria - Research Paper Example

Should the outside world intervene to help the victims of violence in Syria? Should the outside world intervene to help the victims of violence in Syria? Outside intervention in Syria could tip the scale either way. Listed below are the main pros and cons of outside intervention in Syria. Five Strongest Pros Proponents propagate outside intervention in Syria because the Syrian people are being mistreated by the government; reforms that they were promised when Bashar al-Assad took over in 2000 have not yet been implemented. The Syrian government has also committed outrageous human rights violations which have garnered much international support from the outside world for the oppressed Syrians. The internal conflict keeps escalating and gathering an alarmingly rising death toll in its wake, outside intervention is expected to bring a stop to armed conflict in Syria and stabilize the situation. Without outside intervention, internal resolution of the matter seems unlikely because the civil war now also includes sectarian animosity which cannot be brought under control if tackled only internally. Five Strongest Cons Outside intervention could be more harmful for Syria than beneficial because if it opens its gates to intervention, it allows the unavoidable ‘terrorist’ element to become part of this conflict. Furthermore, outside intervention may be the catalyst that sparks the full blown war between the Hezbollah and the party of the West and Saudi Arabia. This could make things worse for Syria by destabilizing it further and increasing armed confrontation. There is also the uncertainty of who will be in control after Assad. Finally, the time for outside intervention may be totally wrong; the opposition leader has recently resigned and thus the opposition’s standing is weak and introducing outside intervention at this point has a big chance of creating a bigger mess. Countries that are allying with the Syrian militants include Turkey, the United States of America, the United Kingdom, France and Saudi Arabia. In 2012, as the civil war worsened and accumulated ever increasing death tolls, countries that were allied with the rebels met in New York to discuss and announce increase in their financial aid to them in hopes of strengthening their position and shifting the balance in their favor. Furthermore, in light of the ongoing human rights violations in Syria the UN human rights commission also agreed to extend and intensify their mission for gathering evidence against the Syrian government in hopes of putting a stop to future persecution of the Syrian people at the hands of the brutal government (Bernard and Meyers, 2012). Jihadists have also promised help for the Syrian militants and are enthusiastic to fight for this cause to free their fellow Muslim brothers from the horrible persecutions of Assad’s regime (Alami, 2012). However, outside intervention has become a much needed option as Syria’s internal condition worsens. The number of refugees has gone up to roughly a million people according to UN estimates, of which half the numbers were children. These people have no money, no jobs and nowhere to go and currently, their situation looks very bleak even with constant support and financial aid from international allies because their sheer numbers are disastrous (Knell, 2013). Furthermore, the death toll in Syria also reached catastrophic numbers: as of the beginning of the year 2013, averaged around 60,000 people roughly, with the number ever increasing as the conflict continues to claim innocent civilian lives in its wake (Sterling and Abdelaziz, 2013). The Red Cross has also surveyed the Syrian situation and come to the conclusion that the human rights violations being committed there are nothing short of disastrous. The longer the situation is left to be, the worse it will get. The Red Cross, which presents a favorable side of outside intervention, is providing food and medical help to the Syrian civilians in these dark times for their country. (RTE News, 2013). The Syrian army on the other hand is being assisted by the Iranian government and military. (Deghan, 2012). With outside intervention in the equation, Assad is also receiving solid help from the Hezbollah who are a group recognized in the west for their terrorist activities (Blanford and Coghlan, 2012) which brings the negativist terrorist element into the equation. The infamous terrorist element has also crept in on the militant’s side from the participation of extremist groups linked to the Al-Qaeda, numbers ranging from 6000 to 10,000 who are part of these extremist groups have joined the FSA (Ignatius, 2012). Opposition to outside intervention also stems from the fact that Syria is not sure who will take power once Assad has been displaced. With Assad gone and no credible parties to step up to take the responsibility of Syria, their situation may even get worse due to the consequent destabilization in the course of the power struggle that follows Assad’s exit from the Syrian stage. Furthermore, in Assad’s absence the major players who can decide Syria’s fate will be divided along sectarian lines. Iran with the Shiite majority and the rebels with a Sunni majority are already at clashes over the deep sectarian divide. But the overall opinion is that Assad has to go because his regime will not be able to hang in for very long. But inevitable as outside military intervention may be, it might just make things worse. For one, outside intervention through militarization could result in a catastrophic contagion and the country could fall into chaos while simultaneously affecting neighboring countries by spreading this chaos towards them and drawing them into the conflict (Marcus, 2012). Furthermore, the time for outside intervention in Syria may be totally wrong at the moment. Very recently the opposition’s leader, Moaz al-Khatib has resigned as he is frustrated with the lack of support from the west. With him gone, the opposition is weaker in its attempts to topple Assad and outside intervention at this point could just make things worse (Tait, 2013). Conclusion The international discourse regarding whether or whether not outside intervention will actually be beneficial for Syria is an ongoing debate that has garnered varying opinions of people who are against it and people who propagate the move. Based upon the secondary research on the topic it seems that for Syria, the better option is to go with outside intervention. This is because the internal situation in Syria is worsening regardless and internal measures to resolve the situation have already failed. The cost that the Syrian people have borne in the wake of this civil war is catastrophic in its sheer degree and as time passes, this only gets worse. Outside intervention represents to Syria a way out of this mess, a resolution of sorts and eventual freedom from Assad’s regime. While many analysts are of the opinion that outside intervention will make things worse, it seems that this will only be the case initially if so. In the longer run, outside intervention will be beneficial for Syria and its people. References: "Humanitarian situation in Syria is catastrophic - Red Cross ", (2013), RTE News, Feb 18. Accessed 28th March 2013. < http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0216/368063-syria-conflict-assad/ > Alami, M. (2012), "Jihadists answer the call in Syria", USA Today, Dec 4. Accessed 28th March 2013. < http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2012/12/03/syria-jihadists/1742759/ > Bernard, A., Meyers, S.L., (2012), "Battle for Aleppo Intensifies, as World Leaders Pledge New Support for Rebels", The New York Times, Sept 28. Accessed 28th March 2013. < http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/29/world/middleeast/syria.html?_r=0> Blanford, N., Coghlan, T. (2012), "Assad backed by 1,500 fighters from Hezbollah, says defector", The Times, Oct 6. Accessed 28th March 2013. Deghan, S.M. (2012), "Syrian Army being aided by Iranian forces. ", The Guardian, May 28. Accessed 28th March 2013. < http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/may/28/syria-army-iran-forces> Ignatius, D. (2012), "Al-Qaeda affiliate playing larger role in Syria rebellion ", The Washington Post, Nov 30. Accessed 30th March 2013. < http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/al-qaeda-affiliate-playing-larger-role-in-syria-rebellion/2012/11/30/203d06f4-3b2e-11e2-9258-ac7c78d5c680_blog.html > Knell, Y. (2013), "Syria conflict: Refugees number a million, says UN", BBC, Mar 6. Accessed 28th March 2013. < http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-21676542 > Marcus, J. (2012), "Analysis: Options for military intervention in Syria ", BBC, Jun 12. Accessed 28th March 2013. < http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-17356556> Sterling, J., Abdelaziz, S. (2013), "U.N.s Syria death toll jumps dramatically to 60,000-plus",CNN, Jan 3. Accessed 28th March 2013. < http://edition.cnn.com/2013/01/02/world/meast/syria-civil-war/index.html > Tait, R. (2013), "Syrian opposition leader resigns, lashing out at West ", The Telegraph, Mar 24. Accessed 28th March 2013. < http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9950968/Syrian-opposition-leader-resigns-lashing-out-at-West.html > Read More