INTRODUCTION
The problem in question here is the crisis in Syria. The crisis began since the last elections in 2011 with a hardline difficult to eradicate opposition fighting a government that stops at nothing to stop its opposition and suppress resistance. The government has reportedly been using chemical weapons, cluster bombs and missile attacks to suppress the rebels. The solution to the problem will involve a military solution given the present state of the situation.
President Bashir la Assad has dealt with the opposition in ways that have severely torn the country with the opposition responding in equally radical ways. Both have employed military solutions with the people divided along religious and ethnic lines. The situation in Syria has given room for the Sunni Islamists opposed to the west to enter into the game with their access to gulf Arab funding and jihadi military techniques giving them a better place. Syria’s war has leaked across its borders to Lebanon that has been historically susceptible to Syrian influence.
So far over 90,000 people have been killed in Syria with more than half being civilians. 1.8 million People have moved out of their country as refugees and another 4 million have been internally displaced. There have also been reports thousands of abducted civilians and reports of torture and human rights violations in state prisons. This has brought the need for the international community to come in to solve the crisis by possibly introducing a political solution.
POSSIBLE INSTRUMENTS
The crisis in Syria is a political crisis that has fallen into a military option. The two fighting sides have taken hard lines and seem unstoppable in destroying the enemy. Using negotiations or any other means will mean that either side has to give in for the other for a given trade off. As with the current situation however, the parties are not any vulnerable to cooperation. The options in place therefore are either; the use of force or foreign military aid. These techniques have been used in the past with Vietnam and Iraq. The intervention will be under full control as the military can pull in or out of the target state upon the choice of decision makers.
USE OF FORCE
Ways and objectives
Use of force will entail bringing in troops and air combat strikes to attack the aggressor who in this case is deemed to Bashar al Assad’s government and army. The operations will involve; conducting air strikes, establishing no fly zones, creating buffer zones and controlling chemical industries in Damascus. The objective will be to suppress the aggressor and change the regime through overseeing democratization of Syria after suppressing the Ba’ath single party regime. The instrument is to be used overtly so that the intervention will be an open affair not left for speculation rumors among other nations. Covert operations could also be administered especially in hunting down high profile masterminds of the civil war particularly those in the government. As stated the use of force will be against the government. This force will first be a threat but; upon any continued aggression against the public (which is expected) then, actual use of force will be employed.
Costs
The intervention by force is obviously an act of war and the costs are like to be high; given the expected operations, the costs are to be at about $3 billion a month. Given the objective will possibly be attained and the stakes involved( saving many lives, restoring justice and human rights and saving a nation from government oppression) the operation might not be entirely expensive as it is worth the course.
Risks
This means however poses a little risks and complexities. For one, like the war in Iraq, the military intervention might take long; this will bring in much costs and definitely loss of military personnel. Another risk is that of international power balance and a possible competition of military supremacy like that seen during the cold war. Already, the east has been said to be in support of the Syrian government. The intervention of the US will definitely find opposition from nations like Russia who might in turn join the other side of the war. Most of the military equipment being used by the government to fight civilians that is; tanks, missiles and artillery are being purchased from Russia. It is therefore an open possibility that military intervention might be used as a showcase of military power diverting attention from the real objective and causing more casualties.
FOREIGN MILITARY AID
Application and objective
The other option is the Intervention by foreign military aid. In this case those to be aided will be the opposition particularly the free Syrian army. This will involve provision of armaments, training of the rebels providing technical assistance such as electronic communication, food and funds. The objective of this intervention will also be changing of regimes. Through empowering the opposition militarily, the government will be toppled and the public will have the chance to bring in a new regime.
The instrument should be used covertly that is the Syrian moderate opposition should quietly be armed. The target in this case will be the opposition in that they are the ones whom the foreign military aid is directed towards. The instrument should not be a threat; rather it should be actual intervention to aid the opposition against the government. Right now, the death toll is high and the government is continuing to suppress resistance; the appropriate timing is therefore immediate. Another factor is the current state of the opposition. Evidently there have been power struggles within the opposition. The opposition therefore requires assistance currently as a little internal conflict may give the government the chance to overwhelm them.
Costs and risks
Estimates show that assisting the opposition military will cost $500 per year. Compared to other military options this instrument is not entirely expensive, besides, the objective is noble as it is an act of upholding human rights and justice. It is therefore worth using this instrument. Use of thus instrument however does not guarantee achievement of the objective. Given past history of military interventions, the defeat of the government does not mean the opposition will establish sufficiently good governance. Instances like Egypt where even after hosting out the president the country was not able to establish a good government and civil unrests prevailed are not rare. Another risk is the kind of opposition being assisted in Syria. Besides the free Syrian army, the opposition is being assisted by the Taliban and the al Nusra which are radical Islamist groups. The assistance of these groups by the US especially in artillery and technology is likely to revolutionize their skills, capabilities and tactics. These might however be used beyond the Syrian crisis since these groups have been linked with terrorism besides radical and violent techniques.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The two instruments are effective and work indifferent ways. However, on the considerations, of costs, risks, and impact, it would be preferable to use foreign military aid. Whereas the operation involving the use of force will involve directly foreign military personnel and possibly foreign casualties, the use of foreign military and will have less foreign personnel involved. Through foreign military aid therefore we will be assisting to overwhelm the government whilst keeping our troops safe. Another reason is that the use of force will cost billions on monthly basis, however using foreign military aid will only cost half a billion annually.
Going also by the stakes involved by the two instruments it is better to uses foreign military aid. For instance the entry of the US into the war by use of force (actual) will lead to the entry of Russia leading to sort of contest for military superiority. Covert operations on aiding the opposition on the other hand will not lead to an outright contest due to no explicit military involvement.
In the process of implementing the foreign military aid however a lot of caution has to be taken. First the opposition should align their interests well to ensure that there are no internal conflicts within the opposition military. Another is that they should have their interests vested in their common good. This is going to be particularly instrumental in the process of putting in place the new government. It should also be seen to it that the opposition is not infiltrated with terrorist groups such as the al Qaeda and other radical Islamists. The assistance should be strictly directed to moderate militia with political motivation. This will ensure that powerful military artillery and technology is not in the wrong hands.
CONCLUSION:
The situation is Syria has reached a critical situation. With the government using force against civilians and a relentless opposition, the death toll is over 100,000; refugees have reached 1.8 million while those internally displaced are 4 million. Both warring sides (government and opposition) have resorted to military solution and as at the current state of the situation; it is the only possible way of ending the crisis.
The possible solution for this crisis is the use of force and the use of foreign military aid. Both are aimed at undermining the military campaigns of the government while empowering the opposition. Use of force involves directly bringing the military and combat campaigns to Syria. This will be largely expensive and is likely to bring in other players in a bid for military supremacy. The use of foreign military aid will involve, remaining advising and arming the opposition to attack the government. This will be cheaper though not entirely guaranteed to bring in good administration. Considering the costs and risks involved however, use of foreign military aid will be far much better than the use of force.
Reference List:
Hauss, C. (2010). International conflict resolution. New York: Continuum.
Mearsheimer, John J., and Stephen M. Walt. The Israel lobby and U.S. foreign policy. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2007.
Starr, S. (2012). Revolt: Eye-witness to the Syrian uprising. London: Hurst.
Voigt, S. (2006). International conflict resolution. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
