Syria is currently the world’s greatest humanitarian catastrophe and most dangerous geopolitical hot spot. The Syrian people are caught in a bloodbath, with more than 400,000 dead and 10 million displaced.
Violent jihadist groups backed by outside patrons mercilessly ravage the country and prey on the population. All parties to the conflict — Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime, the anti-al-Assad forces supported by the US and its allies, and the Islamic State — have committed, and continue to commit, serious war crimes.
It is time for a solution. However, such a solution must be based on a transparent and realistic account of what caused the war in the first place.
The chronology is as follows. In February 2011, peaceful protests were staged in Syria’s major cities, amid the region-wide phenomenon dubbed the “Arab Spring.” The al-Assad regime reacted with a shifting mix of violent repression (shooting at demonstrators) and offers of reform. Soon, the violence escalated. Al-Assad’s opponents accused the regime of using force against civilians without restraint, while the government pointed to the deaths of soldiers and policeman as evidence of violent jihadists among the protestors.
It seems likely that as early as March or April 2011, Sunni anti-regime fighters and arms started to enter Syria from neighboring countries. Many eyewitness accounts tell of foreign jihadists engaging in violent attacks on police officers. (Such accounts are, however, hard to confirm, especially after almost five years.)
The US and its regional allies tried to nudge al-Assad from power in the spring of 2011, thinking that he would fall quickly like former Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak and former Tunisian president Zine El Abidine Ben Ali. Many observers assert that Qatar funded an increase in anti-regime activity within Syria and used the Doha-based broadcaster al-Jazeera to boost anti-al-Assad sentiment worldwide, though such claims are hard to pin down definitively.
The US imposed a tightening noose of trade and financial sanctions on the regime. The Brookings Institution, a bellwether of US official policy, called for al-Assad’s ouster, and anti-al-Assad propaganda in the US media soared. (Until then, al-Assad was considered in the US media to be a relatively benign, albeit authoritarian, ruler, and then-secretary of state Hillary Rodham Clinton noted as late as March 2011 that many in the US Congress regarded al-Assad as a reformer.)
‘AL-ASSAD MUST GO’
The launch of the war can be dated to Aug. 18, 2011, when US President Barack Obama and Clinton declared that “al-Assad must go.” Up to that point, the violence was still containable. Total deaths, including both civilians and combatants, ran perhaps to about 2,900 (according to one tally by regime opponents).
After August, the death rate soared. It is sometimes claimed that the US did not act vigorously at this point. Obama’s political foes generally attack him for having taken too little action, not too much. However, the US did in fact act to topple al-Assad, albeit mostly covertly and through allies, especially Saudi Arabia and Turkey. The CIA and Saudi Arabia covertly coordinated their actions.
Of course, the chronology of the war does not explain it. For that, we need to examine the motivations of the key actors. First and foremost, the war in Syria is a proxy war, involving mainly the US, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Iran. The US and its allies, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, started the war in 2011 in order to overthrow al-Assad’s regime. The US alliance was met with escalating counterforce by Russia and Iran, whose Lebanese proxy army Hezbollah is fighting alongside al-Assad’s government.
The US interest in overthrowing al-Assad’s regime was precisely its reliance on Iranian and Russian backing. Removing al-Assad, US security officials believed, would weaken Iran, undermine Hezbollah and roll back Russia’s geopolitical reach.
The US’ allies, including Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, were interested in replacing al-Assad’s Alawite regime in Syria with a Sunni-led regime (Alawites are a branch of Shia Islam). This, they believed, would also weaken their regional competitor, Iran, and curtail Shia influence in the Middle East more generally.
In believing that al-Assad would be easily overthrown, the US — not for the first time — was relying on its own propaganda. The regime faced deep opposition, but also had considerable internal support. More important, the regime had powerful allies, notably Iran and Russia. It was naive to believe that neither would respond.
The public should appreciate the dirty nature of the CIA-led fight. The US and its allies flooded Syria with Sunni jihadists, just as the US had flooded Afghanistan in the 1980s with Sunni jihadists (the mujahidin) that later became al-Qaeda. Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar and the US have regularly backed some of the most violent jihadist groups in a cynical miscalculation that these proxies would do their dirty work and then somehow be pushed aside.
According to the US and European mainstream media, Russia’s military intervention in Syria is treacherous and expansionist. The truth is different. The US is not allowed under the UN Charter to organize an alliance, fund mercenaries and smuggle heavy weapons to overthrow another country’s government. Russia in this case is reacting, not acting. It is responding to US provocations against its ally.
SIX PRINCIPLES
Ending the war requires adherence to six principles. First, the US should cease both overt and covert operations to overthrow Syria’s government. Second, the UN Security Council should implement the ceasefire now under negotiation, calling on all countries, including the US, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Qatar and Iran, to stop arming and funding military forces within Syria.
Third, all paramilitary activities should cease, including those of so-called “moderates” backed by the US. Fourth, the US and Russia — and, indeed, the UN Security Council — should hold Syria’s government strictly responsible to desist from punitive actions against regime opponents. Fifth, the political transition should take place gradually and with confidence building on all sides, rather than through an arbitrary, destabilizing rush to “free elections.”
Finally, the Gulf states, Turkey and Iran should be pressed to negotiate face-to-face on a regional framework that can ensure lasting peace. Arabs, Turks and Iranians have all lived with each other for millennia. They, not the outside powers, should lead the way to a stable order in the region.
Jeffrey Sachs is a professor of sustainable development and health policy and management, and director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
The bird flu outbreak at US dairy farms keeps finding alarming new ways to surprise scientists. Last week, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) confirmed that H5N1 is spreading not just from birds to herds, but among cows. Meanwhile, media reports say that an unknown number of cows are asymptomatic. Although the risk to humans is still low, it is clear that far more work needs to be done to get a handle on the reach of the virus and how it is being transmitted. That would require the USDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to get
For the incoming Administration of President-elect William Lai (賴清德), successfully deterring a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) attack or invasion of democratic Taiwan over his four-year term would be a clear victory. But it could also be a curse, because during those four years the CCP’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) will grow far stronger. As such, increased vigilance in Washington and Taipei will be needed to ensure that already multiplying CCP threat trends don’t overwhelm Taiwan, the United States, and their democratic allies. One CCP attempt to overwhelm was announced on April 19, 2024, namely that the PLA had erred in combining major missions
On April 11, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida delivered a speech at a joint meeting of the US Congress in Washington, in which he said that “China’s current external stance and military actions present an unprecedented and the greatest strategic challenge … to the peace and stability of the international community.” Kishida emphasized Japan’s role as “the US’ closest ally.” “The international order that the US worked for generations to build is facing new challenges,” Kishida said. “I understand it is a heavy burden to carry such hopes on your shoulders,” he said. “Japan is already standing shoulder to shoulder
Former president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) used to push for reforms to protect Taiwan by adopting the “three noes” policy as well as “Taiwanization.” Later, then-president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) wished to save the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) by pushing for the party’s “localization,” hoping to compete with homegrown political parties as a pro-Taiwan KMT. However, the present-day members of the KMT do not know what they are talking about, and do not heed the two former presidents’ words, so the party has suffered a third consecutive defeat in the January presidential election. Soon after gaining power with the help of the KMT’s