The Situation in Syria Is Marked by Conflict - Essay Example

CONFLICT IN SYRIA al Affiliation) US National Security Council (NSC) Official Briefing: the National Security Adviser on why Rebel Groups may take control of Parts of Syria The United States was under obligation to reshape the long-standing policy developments that she had over the Syrian conflict in the summer of 2014 after the insurgent ISIS launched an offensive in the neighboring Iraq. The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, better known as ISIS have control of vast regions of the northeastern parts of Syria. It is in this region that the resurgent Islamic state continues to launch attacks against the forces aligned with and opposed to the Bashar al Asad government. This fighting is rampant in the entire Syria, hence outlining the Syrian conflict as that pitting the foreign allies and the government against the groups of insurgents who are mainly against the government (Syrian conflict spills into cyberspace, 2013). Since the end of the World War II, the context of International Relations to the United States has transformed largely. The nation being the world’s superpower has the mandate to maintain this position by asserting its influence on global issues that define the nature of global cohesion. Therefore, the conflict in Syria, as experienced in other nations such as Libya and Iraq, requires the intervention of the United States. Through the National Security Council, the National Security Advisor of the Head of State reviews the situation in Syria, mapping out the possible implications of the ongoing conflict in accordance with the traditional American viewpoint of International Relations (Choi and James, 2014). The Syrian Conflict may encounter the rebels taking control of most parts of the country because certain foreign forces allied to the ISIS rebels continue funding this movement. Due to the barbaric use of chemical weapons by the Syrian leader on the people of that country, many countries have expressed their solidarity against the leader. This unity between the foreign countries and the radicals empowers the rebels through offering them advanced weapons and funds to fight against the oppression endured by the innocent citizens. In response to these actions, the United States Security Council decided that the United States needs to conduct limited attacks against the Syrian leadership. The U.S holds the mantle for being the most democratic state, and believes that it is the obligation of each government to protect their citizens. Therefore, the choice to join the Syrian government in fighting ISIS will be an indication that U.S supports oppression, while the collaboration with rebel forces will insinuate that the U.S is a state that does not recognize the leaders chosen to represent a people. The Realists believe that each nation pursues its individual interests towards attaining regional and global security and power. The involvement of the United States in the conflict in Syria is a bid by the country to end the war and restore significant semblance of peace in the region. Therefore, power equals peace. In the view of the Syrian conflict, the realist notion contributes to the escalating dominance of the rebels against the government. Driven by the assumption of more power more peace, the rebels derive a fighting course that strengthens their frameworks within the region (Maness and Valeriano, 2015). The Syrian government on the other hand is mainly dealing with suppressing the rebellious forces, with no major fighting course. This explains why the rebels have the ability to take control of other parts of Syria. While the army is bent on ambushing the rebels’ strongholds, they leave the other parts of the country insecure, therefore posing a threat of takeover of these insecure regions by the insurgent ISIS. Being that the Assad Regime in Syria holds a tremendous hazard of its chemical weapons around the world, the United States views this as a threat to the national security. Chemical weapons are lethal and can destroy many human lives in a single attack. Many countries in the world, like the United States, express their worries about irresponsible leaders having possession of chemical weapons. Therefore, many nations will at all costs fight the growth of these weapons in the Syrian arsenal, and assert more influence against the use of these weapons by strengthening the rebels. The collaboration of these nations with the rebels against the use of chemical weapons is a recipe for growing strength of the rebels in Syria, hence their expansion into other territories within the country. In addition to that, the gains that the Islamic State registers in Iraq are a possible indication of the continuous flow of fighters and weapons into northeastern Syria. The rebels have a strong base in Iraq, ironically supported by a majority of the Iraqi citizens. Iraq represents a training base for the youthful recruits who go into the battle zones to fight for the infamous Islamic course. The inflow of these fighters backed by superior weapons, poses a threat to the Syrian Army to contain these factors (Armed Conflict Work Group of the In, 2013). The continued efforts by the United States to talk the Syrian leader into stepping aside further encourage the course of the rebels. Stepping into the conflict is an ultimate way that the United States uses to ensure that the Middle East region endures peace and overcomes the violation of human rights by the Syrian government. Nonetheless, the calls for a transitional government strengthen the Islamic State rebels, further encouraging them to push their agenda forward because their impact is evident in other countries. Furthermore, the strengthening bilateral ties between the Syrian government and the Iraqi government concerning the coordination on how to fight the militants encourages the ISIS leaders to unite further against the Syrian regime. Since the early stages of 2014, the ISIS rebels have put more emphasis on securing the Northeastern parts of the Syrian territory. This dominance has created a constant supply link between the Eastern Syria and the western part of Iraq, with the rebels gaining more confidence on invading other parts of Syria. The reluctance by the Syrian government to attack this region has led to the militants drawing plans on how to attack the Western parts of Syria. The government forces, however, have distinct operation in Western Syria. This concentration on one part of the territory poses a potential risk to the government as the rebels’ army grows and strategizes on how to capture these regions from the government. The Assad Government plays a critical part in the spread of the Islamic State rebellions in the Syrian territory. The government has not devoted a significant amount of resources to stabilize the situation by combating the rebellious groups. Despite assistance from the allied members, the Syrian government has continuously failed in allocating enough work force and machinery to guard the spread of the insurgency. This is in part due to the government notion about the opposition, which states it is dominated by extremists (Maoz, 2014). The government is satisfied about the insurgent attacks on other anti government groups. The complete reluctance by the government to tame the ISIS operations in northeast Syria appears to benefit the rebels. The elections held in Syria ensured that Assad had a third consecutive seven-year term in charge of the war torn country. This win, in the view of the European Union, the United States and the Syrian opposition, was illegitimate and marred by constitutional irregularities. The disregard of democracy by the Syrian leader in the electioneering process is a contributor to the spread of the Islamic state in other parts of Syria. Gaining support of major superpowers in the world against condemning the vote is a boost for the Islamic State to fight more for the liberation of the people. Liberalists, however, believe that it is important to embrace dialogue in conflict resolution. The formation of special tribunals to find an amicable solution, according to the United States policies, indicates the determination of the country to defend the national interests in democracy (Gifkins, 2012). Since the brutal violence begun in Syria, the United States has employed a diplomatic approach to solving the problem. The warring parties have been invited to negotiating tables, with the political situation being a complete factor in driving these talks. Nevertheless, the United States believes that full recognition of the solution of this brutality lies in political mitigation between the conflicting factions. The country, therefore, has collaborated with numerous European allies to impose comprehensive and robust sanctions on the Syrian leadership. The United States has also championed for the formation of a United Nations Commission of Inquiry that will look into the situation in Syria (Webb, 2014). This is part of the larger policy to include other global nations in reaching a unifying decision in dealing with the atrocities and violations in Syria. The U.S publicized the warnings against the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian leader, through Iran and Russia. With the above approaches bearing minimal advances, the United States settled on the employment of limited military strikes. In conclusion, the United States plays a significant role in counter terrorism and fight against violation of human rights. However, the national interests provide the major pillar for the involvement of the United States in mitigation of foreign crisis. References Armed Conflict Work Group of the In, (2013). Armed Conflict: A Model for Understanding and Intervention. Death Studies, 37(1), pp.61-88. Choi, S. and James, P. (2014). Why Does the United States Intervene Abroad? Democracy, Human Rights Violations, and Terrorism. Journal of Conflict Resolution. Gifkins, J. (2012). The UN Security Council Divided: Syria in Crisis. Global Responsibility to Protect, 4(3), pp.377-393. Maness, R. and Valeriano, B. (2015). The Impact of Cyber Conflict on International Interactions.Armed Forces & Society. Maoz, M. (2014). The Arab Spring in Syria: Domestic and regional developments. Dynamics of Asymmetric Conflict, 7(1), pp.49-57. Syrian conflict spills into cyberspace. (2013). Computer Fraud & Security, 2013(9), pp.1-3. Webb, P. (2014). Deadlock or Restraint? The Security Council Veto and the Use of Force in Syria.Journal of Conflict and Security Law, 19(3), pp.471-488. Read More