US Foreign Policy and the Syrian Conflict - Literature review Example

US Foreign Policy and the Syrian Conflict of Your This paper examines the case of the Syrian Conflict which has claimed hundreds of thousands of lives. The paper examines the context of the war and its implications for the people of Syria and the regional matters and balances. In this framework, the United States foreign policy is critiqued and analyzed in relation to the crisis. The paper reviews the position of the United States vis-a-vis other global powers like Russia and China which have supported the Assad regime and led to continued hostilities. The paper reviews the position taken by the top powers and the United States actions and actions in relation to the war and its implications for the larger region at large. The paper ultimately concludes with an opinion on the wider US policy towards the region and its success or failure. Introduction The Arab Spring commenced with demonstrations and a political uprising in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya. All the uprisings led to the toppling of regimes and the replacement of governments that had existed for several decades. In Syria however, the demonstrations that started in the city of Homs and other towns was crashed violently by the government of Bashar Al-Assad. Olimart identifies that the Assad regime got the support of Russia and China to survive through months of violent uprising waged by various Syrian and foreign militant Islamic groups (2013) . Militant Islamist groups have moved into Syria to fight and contribute to the attempt to overthrow the Assad regime. However, Assad has survived with the help of his allies in Iran and Hezbollah in Lebanon. And the war still continues. This paper will examine American foreign policy relating to Syria in this period of massive killings and destruction and evaluate whether it is appropriate or not. The paper will seek to examine the role of the United States in dealing with various international relations actors in order to pass an opinion on US foreign policy in relation to the conflict in Syria Background of the Conflict The conflict in Syria started “...when an uprising led by various opposition members was crashed violently and people were detained and tortured” (Roy, 2013, p423). Based on this, the Syrian rebels got armed and they started an uprising that sought to topple the Bashar Al-Assad regime. On a critical analysis, this uprising was part of a larger framework of discontent and protests that had gained popularity in the Middle East and North Africa after Gaddafi and Mubaraks ousting and overthrow from popular uprisings. Thus, the people of Syria probably sought to use their grievances as a means of dealing with a regime that they did not like. However, in the quest to assert themselves as the main ruling power and authority, the Assad regime struck back in a very deadly manner and they killed thousands of protestors in opposition strongholds. The Assad regime is an Allawite regime that is a branch of Islam that is considered by the Sunni oriented Wahabbis or radical Saudi-led Islamists as infidels. Thus, being the minority of just about 10% of the population, the Allawites had created a strong regime centered around Bashar Al-Assad (and previously, his father, Hafiz Al-Assad). This dynasty has sought to survive with the help of Iran and the Soviet Union. There were massive atrocities in 1982 when similar uprisings begun against Hafiz Al-Assad. This led to massive bloodshed and a strong criticism from the international community. The regime has survived through massive imprisonment of enemies within and has also placed various restrictions on the people and the members of the community. Thus, it could be argued that the rebels use of arms to defend themselves was legitimate since the Assad regime had in the past used violent means to suppress demonstration. Thus, the Syrian rebels fought and faced the enemy and created a major attempt to topple the Assad Regime. In reaction, Iran sent a delegation to show support and consolidation. “Being a Shiite regime that is also considered an infidel unit of Islam, the Shiite government of Iran had built and maintained strong ties with the Syrian Arab Republic under Bashar Al-Assad” (Seale, 2012: p1129). And as such, the Syrian regime was close to them and they sought to promote some degree of cooperation with them. With Irans intervention on the Assad side of the conflict and Hezbollahs entry on the side of Bashar Al-Assad, the Syrian rebels stood up and began to demand support from the enemies of this regime and organization (Seale, 2012). They sought help from Wahabbi-oriented Al-Qaeda groups that campaigned for numerous armed groups to be sent into Syria to help in the war effort against the Assad regime. This call for assistance and help included the mobilization of thousands of Sunni militant Islamist groups that sent troops from over 87 countries to fight against the Syrian regime because they considered it as a religious duty to save the lives of other Sunni Muslims in times like that (Matthew, 2014). The Syrian opposition was labeled a bunch of terrorists by the Assad regime and its allies. The parties in the West called them the Free-Syrian Army that had the duty of fighting to free Syria from its opponents. The Syrian rebel group was seen in the Western media as a group of freedom fighters that were seeking democracy in a country where many people were oppressed. The Free Syrian Army therefore appealed to the United States to provide them with weapons and ammunition to deal with the threat of Bashar Al-Assad and his regime. However, with the support of Iran and Russia, the Assad regime was able to block all the attempts by the United States to seek the right to provide support to the rebels in Syria through the UN Security Council. Russia consistently blocked all attempts to seek a Gaddafi-type of UN resolution that would support an aerial bombardment. Thus, the United States was left with the option of unilaterally intervening in Syria to help the rebels. In spite of the fact that the United States has strong influence in international affairs, it is apparent that taking unilateral actions in Syria had implications because they had the support of Russia and China which was strongly connected to Iran which was in turn strongly allied to the Assad regime. Actors in the Conflict The central actor in the conflict is Russia. Although the Assad regime is at the forefront, the continued survival of the regime is due to Russia and China, two UN Security Council permanent members who have stood strongly behind the Iranian regime. Russia had major issues and problems in penetrating the Middle East. This is because they had few allies in the region. However, Syria has built a strong and unwavering relationship with Russia from Soviet days. After the Cold War, Russia tried to expand its influence in the region to Turkey. However, Russian-Turkish relationships have been poor over the past three years due to the Syrian Crisis (Ersen, 2013). Russian-Turkish animosity has existed for hundreds of years. It moved through the 19th Century and the two countries fought over disputes related to their long common borderline which was always a symbol of dispute. In the First World War, the Ottoman Empire (Turkey) fought against Russia but lost. After the Second World War, Turkey took sides with NATO against Russia (then the Soviet Union). After the Cold War, Russia sought to build relationships with Turkey, but the war in Syria has drawn Turkey against Russia (Danitoglu, 2013). Being a NATO member, Turkey is naturally drawn against Iran and Syria. And with Russias continued effort in supporting the Assad regime, Turkey has become more and more distant from Russia and has been drawn into a diplomatic disagreement with the Syrian regime and Iran. Obviously, Russia and China cannot turn their back on Iran and Irans ally, Syria because Iran plays a critical role in dealing with the energy needs and the expectations of these two economies and hence, they are naturally inclined to support the Iranian-Syrian Axis. However, China plays a more passive role than Russia because from the Cold War, China has always played the role of a non-aligned power or authority in global affairs. “Russias fundamental interests relates to their desire to prevent Western domination and imposition of rules and principles on nations around the world” (Roy, 2013 p425). Russia also seeks to prevent fundamentalist Islam and this is due to the fact that it has major problems with terrorism in the Caucuses region and it seeks to provide a strong resistance against such troops that continue to provide major support to the anti-Assad campaign. Vladimir Putin has announced strongly that any attempts by any government to depose the Assad regime as advocated in US foreign policy is illegal in international law. And hence, Russia has asked for the right processes to be carried out. Russia presents itself as a nation that wants a multipolar global order rather than a unipolar global order that is influenced solely by the west (Roy, 2013). On the other hand, the Syrian-American Council is made up of exiled Syrians and other dominant nations in the Persian-Gulf region that seek to topple the Assad regime (Pasquini, 2012). This is a pro-democracy group that seeks to use various methods of lobbying and protests to get the US government and other Western nations to instill democracy in Syria. US Foreign Policy towards the Conflict The United States foreign policy is to promote and support the democratic process. The US government officials have stated time and again that Bashar Al-Assad has lost legitimacy with his people and as such, he must step down and allow a transitional process to begin (Hanky, 2013). This was the position announced by Hillary Clinton and restated by John Kerry. The Geneva I convention that was conducted could not get any kind of compromise between the parties. The buffer remained and more foreign troops moved into Syria to help the rebels. In terms of intervening, the US President, Barrack Obama has come out to state that it will not want to take an overt step by “putting boots on the ground” in Syria (Hanky, 2013). However, the United States announced that the only issue that will cause then US to intervene directly militarily is a situation where the Syrian regime uses chemical weapons against its citizens. This is something the Assad regime has vowed never to use. Thus, the US has been virtually powerless in taking any decisive action against the Bashar Al-Assad regime. In lieu of an American intervention, various mosques around the world, including the United States have mobilized troops and sent them to fight in Syria in support of the rebels. The United States hesitance in intervening has contributed to a long period of bloodshed and killings and this has created a situation that has become complicated and will need some degree of intervention to be completed or addressed. Any attempt for the United States to seek a proper authorization from the United Nations has been vetoed by Russia. Clearly, Russia seeks to maintain a system where the values of the UN will be respected and national integrity and territorial sovereignty can be upheld in all situations and contexts. The United States position announced in September 2013 that the United States will threaten Syria with the use of force unless Syrias regime gives up its weapons of mass destruction which includes the chemical weapons stock that it possesses (Radia, 2013). This is something that the Assad regime has not responded to. This is because a threat of war is not the same as war itself. And due to the fact that the threat is conditional, the Assad regime is somewhat secured and protect from any immediate assault by the United States. Four months on, in the Conference of Montereux, the United States continued to hold the position that Bashar Al-Assad cannot play any role in any future transition (Matthew, 2014). Thus, the United States insists that Assad must step down before any talks can be held. In his opening lines, John Kerry stated that "The right to lead a country does not come from torture, nor barrel bombs, nor Scud missiles... it comes from the consent of the people." (Pearson et al, 2014). This is clearly against the Russian position which states that for decades, the Assad regime has been the only legitimate regime in the country. And hence, they have the right to be respected and their internal affairs must be pursued without any foreign interference. The Montereux Conference did not really yield much. The parties could not make any basic headway save for constant accusations. The Assad regime has won elections in the country for 40 years and their claim that the Syrian people must decide in a referendum is seen to be problematic because the opposition claim that the Assad regime will rig the referendum. Russia and the Assad regime insists that the Assad government is the legitimate government in Syria at the moment and hence, there is no backing in international law to sideline the current leader because of violent opposition. Thus, the Montereux conference showed that the US position is up against a strong resistance. Critical Review of Americas Policy towards Syria The UN Charter states that the nations of the United Nations are to be treated equally in a family of nations. Every nations territorial integrity and national sovereignty is guaranteed by the UN Charter. In that sense, every nations recognized and legitimate government is to be given equal respect and equal honor. In this case, the rebels in Syria are demanding change against a legitimate government that was represented on the United Nations. Thus, it is wrong and illegal for the United States to pronounce that government as one that has lost legitimacy. Clearly, until the constitution of Syria can be overthrown, the Syrian government can remain in power for as long as necessary. Therefore, it is apparent that the United States request for Assad to step down is incompatible with international law. This is because it is an interference in the affairs of a sovereign state. In this case, the peace process must go on. And the international community, led by the United States and the other Arab nations in the region must request for a series of changes to be made under the aegis of Bashar Al-Assad. To this end, important pointers and requirements must be given to Assad and the entire Syrian population and a new constitution must be redrawn by both the opposition and the Assad regime. The USs requests and demands for changes and modifications is not within the right context of international law. It is an interference that is not legal and unacceptable in international law. Hence, the United States needs to back down on its claims and allow the nationals of Syria to vote in a free and fair election and decide what kind of constitution they want and what kind of leader that they will prefer. Bashar Al-Assad must remain an interim leader and a new constitution must be drawn that will see to it that power is rightfully transferred under a transparent system of governance. This will include a method and a system of dealing with the problems and issues related to the conflict and also a provision of a proper and acceptable method of dealing with the crisis. Conclusion The American foreign policy has been centered on the need for Bashar-Al Assad to step down for a new transition process to commence. This is incompatible with the UN Convention and the UN Charter. This is the position taken by Russia and China and based on that, they have blocked all attempts by the US to launch a military campaign against the Assad regime. There is therefore the need for the United States to rather request for the creation of a new constitution that will satisfy all Syrians and a more transparent referendum that cannot be overriden by the existing regime that will provide the best needs and interests of the Syrian people. References Bagdonan, A. (2013) “Russian Interests in the Syrian Conflict: Power, Prestige and Profit” European Journal of Economic and Political Studies pp55 – 77 Available at: http://ejeps.fatih.edu.tr/docs/articles/159.pdf Danitoglu, D. (2013) “Annual Report – 2012” Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs Istanbul: Center for Strategic Research Available at: http://sam.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Sam_Annual-Report_2012_int1.pdf Ersen, E. (2013) “Emerging Problems in the Ankara-Moscow Axis: The Syrian Crisis and National Missile Defence” Middle Eastern Analysis 5(60) pp44 – 51 Available at: http://www.academia.edu/5442544/Emerging_Problems_in_the_Ankara-Moscow_Axis_The_Syrian_Crisis_and_NATO_Missile_Defence Hanky, D. C. (2013) “How Syrian Crisis Affects its Neighbors” Washington Report on Middle Eastern Affairs 32(1) pp68 – 69 Available at: http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/proceedings/84603777/how-syrian-crisis-affects-neighbors Matthew, C. (2014) “John Kerry: Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad will not be Part of Transitional Government” Associated Press [Online] Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/22/assad-syria-transitional-government_n_4642362.html Retrieved January 31, 2014. Olimart, Mohammed. (2013) China and the Middle East: From Silk Road to Arab Spring London: Routledge Pasquini, E. (2012) “Dramatic Street Theater Brings Attention to Syrian Crisis” Washington Report on Middle Eastern Affairs 31(3) Available at: http://www.wrmea.org/wrmea-archives/507-washington-report-archives-2011-2015/may-2012/11188-human-rights-dramatic-street-theater-brings-attention-to-syrian-crisis.html Pearson, Michael, Labbot, E. and Abedine, S. (2014) “Syria Defiant at Conference: Kerry Rules Out Assad” CNN International Edition. [Online] Available at: http://edition.cnn.com/2014/01/22/world/europe/syria-geneva-talks/ Retrieved: March 6, 2014. Radia, Kirit. (2013) “John Kerry Rejects Syrias Demand to Drop Threat of Military Force” Good Morning America [Onlne] Avalable at: http://abcnews.go.com/International/john-kerry-rejects-syrias-demand-drop-threat-military/story?id=20232370 Retrieved: January 31, 2014 Roy, A. (2013) “Russia & Syria: Exploring Alignment with a Regime in Crisis” International Affairs 89(4) Available at: http://www.chathamhouse.org/publications/ia/archive/view/193085 Seale, P .(2012) “The Syrian Crisis and the New Cold War” Report on Middle Eastern Affairs 31 (2) Available at: http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/73467756/syrian-crisis-new-cold-war Annotated Bibliography Bagdonan, A. (2013) “Russian Interests in the Syrian Conflict: Power, Prestige and Profit” European Journal of Economic and Political Studies pp55 – 77 This paper examines the main motivations and expectations of Russia in the Syrian Crisis. The journal explores important pointers and elements of Russias position in the warfare and its roots in historical matters and patterns. The journal pursues a deep insight and a deep evaluation of the matters and situations that relate to the power and political struggle of Russia in the attempt to retain their position as global leaders and authorities through the Syrian conflict. Danitoglu, D. (2013) “Annual Report – 2012” Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs Istanbul: Center for Strategic Research This is the annual report of the SAM Think Tank. This is an insight into the affairs of the Turkish foreign ministry and its intercepting matters in the year 2012. The report showcases major matters, issues and patterns that relates to the Middle Eastern region and how it has influenced major matters like the Syrian conflict. SAM is an independent think tank in Turkey that evaluates the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Ersen, E. (2013) “Emerging Problems in the Ankara-Moscow Axis: The Syrian Crisis and National Missile Defence” Middle Eastern Analysis 5(60) pp44 – 51 This paper critiques the relationships between Turkey and Russia over the centuries. It provides an insight into the issues and dominant matters that relates to the Russian-Turkish relations and how it has been modified and changed over the years due to impending circumstances and matters. This situation is expanded further to provide an insight into the main elements and aspects of the existing conflict in Syria. This provides a framework for the different perspectives and views of the factions in the region and how it is fueling the Syrian Crisis. Hanky, D. C. (2013) “How Syrian Crisis Affects its Neighbors” Washington Report on Middle Eastern Affairs 32(1) pp68 – 69 This examines the broader picture of the Syrian crisis in the context of the Middle East. The process discusses how the other parties in the Middle East affect and are affected by the affairs and happenings in Syria and its implications for the long term and historic matters and patterns in the region. Matthew, C. (2014) “John Kerry: Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad will not be Part of Transitional Government” Associated Press [Online] Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/22/assad-syria-transitional-government_n_4642362.html Retrieved January 31, 2014. This features the elements and aspects of the Montereux conference that was meant to deal with the issue. The conference was meant to build on the Geneva I conference that laid the foundations for the discussions. The United States position on the crisis as elucidated by Senator John Kerry is captured in this article in a firsthand manner and it shows important insights into the matters and the situation at hand. Olimart, Mohammed. (2013) China and the Middle East: From Silk Road to Arab Spring London: Routledge Mohammed Olimart examines Chinas interests and motivations for trade and investments in the Middle East. This examines the historical context within which the Chinese people have traded with the Arab world and how the dynamics of the Cold War shaped their interaction and connection with the Middle Eastern countries and communities. It shows how Syrias regime under Bashar Al-Assad and his father have survived for generations Pasquini, E. (2012) “Dramatic Street Theater Brings Attention to Syrian Crisis” Washington Report on Middle Eastern Affairs 31(3) This journal provides an insight into the organization of exiled Syrian nationals, particularly those in the United States. The journal discusses the processes and approaches used by these exiles in dealing with the Syrian Crisis and how they lobby for help and support to be given to the rebels in Syria which they call the Free Syrian Army. Radia, Kirit. (2013) “John Kerry Rejects Syrias Demand to Drop Threat of Military Force” Good Morning America [Onlne] Avalable at: http://abcnews.go.com/International/john-kerry-rejects-syrias-demand-drop-threat-military/story?id=20232370 Retrieved: January 31, 2014 This article provides a firsthand information about US Secretary of State, John Kerrys position on the Syrian Crisis in September 2013. This involves the reaction to the processes and systems that were put forward by Bashar Al-Assad and the Syrian regime towards a ceasefire. The process involves the presentation of information about the US official position and how the United States sought to end the conflict. Roy, A. (2013) “Russia & Syria: Exploring Alignment with a Regime in Crisis” International Affairs 89(4) This is a paper that examines the main motivations in Russias intervention in Syria and their support for Syria. The main pointers and matters that are important in the affairs of Russia and Syria are discussed in great detail and this provides an explanation to the matters at hand. Seale, P .(2012) “The Syrian Crisis and the New Cold War” Report on Middle Eastern Affairs 31 (2) This article discusses the position the position of Bashar Al-Assad and his supporters in the context of the Middle Eastern region. It shows that there are faultines that have emerged which mirror the Sunni-Shite divisions that have lasted for over a millennium. These complications are also linked to the larger elements of the Cold War and historic matters and has redrawn the battlelines in the Syrian crisis. Read More