Introduction
The dramatic events of the so called “Arab Spring” are still unfolding in many parts of the Middle East. Syria is still experiencing this wave even though it is entering its fourth year of this uprising which has evolved to the point of a civil war. The Sunni-dominated civil uprising in Syria has taken dramatic shift as it has failed to bring down President Bashar al- Assad regime, unlike other Arab countries where the toppling of regimes took place swiftly. President Bashar al- Assad’s family has ruled Syria for forty years. Assad is from the minority group or sect of the Alawite in Syria, an upcoming of the Shi’ite Islam that has supported him strongly. A report published by the British Conservative Middle East Council indicate that the Syrian regime responded to the civil uprising by protecting itself and adopting an aggressive survival strategy rather than addressing the concerns of the people. The report describes the government response as choosing wrong combination of gradual concessions and brutal repressions which led to a crisis of confidence too deep to be overcome by mere calls for national reform and dialogue (The Conservative Middle East Council).
The Syrian regime’s survival strategy has reached the point of utilizing all of its capabilities and excessive force against the rebels. There are, for example, reports of the use of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) by the regime. It is alleged that Assad’s regime used chemical weapons against certain highly populated areas with little rebels’ presence indiscriminately resulting to a genocide causing a wide scale mass casualties and deaths among civilians including children this year. The Syrian regime, which has and controls the chemical weapon arsenal, tested and challenged the international community especially the West.
According to CNN, (2012, December 12), President Obama had warned previously that any use of chemical weapons by Syria in its civil war would be crossing a "red line" which would prompt a swift U.S. response. The U.S and her allies, therefore, wanted to punish the Assad regime for these atrocities against innocent civilians. However, political allegiances and interests created international dispute between the West and U.S. in one hand and Russia and China on the other hand which has encouraged the Syrian regime to pursue all aggressive and inhumane means to suppress the insurgency. The international community, as a result, has failed to curb Assad’s government aggression against his own people and this has created a dangerous environment where Jihadists and Islamist militias have stepped in to fill the gap created by the absence of international military intervention to defend the people of Syria.
Sectarian conflict in Syria, which has further deepened the crisis, is another dimension to consider. Key players in the Syrian sectarian conflict and civil war are Iran and Hezbollah. Iran is considered a rogue state that is attempting to develop nuclear weapons while Hezbollah is a terrorist group which is found in the Middle East. Syria and Iran have, therefore, entered a long-term stable alliance which has lasted to this day. On the other hand, the Saudis and Turks in addition to the Americans have all been hostile to the regime of President Bashar al Assad. Iran is the one country that has wholly remained supportive of the current Syrian government. (Friedman, G. 2011). Having multiplayers in the Syrian game is a key factor that has created an atmosphere of chaos where jihadists have become not only active, but are supported by countries such as Turkey and other Arab countries like the Saudis.
One important strategic point that needs to be addressed as far as Jihadists in Syria are concerned is that they share very similar goals with Al Qaeda, which is to oust secular Arab regimes in order to facilitate the full and strict application of their version of Islamic Sharia. That said, there is no doubt that both Al Qaeda and those Jihadist groups in Syria found a golden opportunity to exploit the unrest and utilize the civil uprising for their own propagandas. The aspects of the crisis mentioned earlier in this brief study have, therefore, opened a door for Jihadists to operate as freedom fighters. Most prominent terrorist groups in the Middle East and especially in the Arab world receive limited popular support regardless of their identities because of the nature of their acts. In Syria, however, under the current circumstances of aggression and oppressive practices of the government against the Muslim-Sunni dominated population, they have much better opportunity to grow and fill in the power vacuum. According to Bokhari, K. (2012, February 14), Jihadists have recognized their limitations and have focused on conducting attacks which are intended to create crises within target countries and their external relations -- as is the case in Yemen and Pakistan. The jihadist, therefore, hope to seize power by creating enough disorder.
The international community including the U.S. is reluctant to support the armed opposition including the Free Syrian Army (FSA) because of the chaos and extreme lack of accountability. This is especially because many Jihadist groups affiliated with Al Qaeda have control over many war zones in Syria. This study, therefore, proposes that, whether the conflict is resolved militarily or diplomatically through reaching a settlement with the current government, major security ramifications will take place.
There are, therefore, two main areas of concern pertaining the Syrian situation beyond the civil war. First, it is the growth of Syrian Islamist armed militias and groups especially those affiliated with Al Qaeda in terms of skills, tactics and special armament capabilities (technologically advanced). The second concern is the mobilization of Islamist foreign-fighters who are going to Syria to fight alongside the opposition. The number of foreign “Jihadists” going to Syria portrayed as freedom fighters is increasing. According to the Washington Times, Jabhat al-Nusra’s leadership comprise of about 80% of foreigners and as much of its 20% of its 6,000-7000 fighters from other nations. Forty percent of the Islamic state of Iraq and Syria’s 4,000-5,000 fighters are all foreigners. This is according to the Syrian Support Group distributing U.S supplies to the opposition rebels. Several dozen Syrian rebel groups split from the Syrian National Coalition earlier this month, and about a dozen rebel groups formed an Islamist bloc with Jabhat al-Nusra late last month. Those radicalized fighters will pose a threat to their home countries when they return, said Michael Scheuer, a former CIA analyst.
Equipped with military and war skills and armed with special advanced weapons, foreign Jihadists form a major security threat to U.S. homeland security. It is unlikely that those Jihadists will lay down their weapon and return back to their home countries even if the situation in Syria has been resolved because they will be prosecuted. Those foreign fighters came to Syria for a specific purpose and likely to be manipulated to serve radical groups’ objectives. History shows that such activists are determined and likely to pursue their objective of establishing Caliphate and application of Sharia law such as the case in Afghanistan. These two groups form the major security threat to U.S. interests, values and security and this threat is likely to grow in post-war Syria or even worse in the scenario of a failed state mentioned earlier in this research.
In conclusion, the political debate in the U.S. on the military intervention in Syria continues while Syria is witnessing a significant raise in the number of Islamist armed activists. There is a rise in the number of Jihadist fighters who pose a major security threat to the United States and her allies as they are equipped with military skills and are armed with special advanced weapons. Syria is, therefore, turning to “a hub for Jihad” under rising calls to support the oppressed population while diplomacy efforts have failed to resolve the situation or stop the bloodshed in Syria. The most dangerous scenario is that Syria will turn into a failed state to become an “Afghanistan” version of the Middle East as echoed by Turkish president. Its strategic location near Israel, a major U.S ally in the Middle East, the nature of the conflict, the identity and affiliation of fighting groups and the political interest by external players form a dangerous combination that in total created the present crisis. This dangerous scenario of a failed state holds a significant security implication to the U.S. because it is very likely to undermine the Global War On terror.
References
Bokhari, K. (2012, February 14). Jihadist Opportunities in Syria. Retrieved November 3, 2013, from Stratfor Global Intelligince: http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/jihadist- opportunities-syria?topics=306
CNN. (2012, December 12). Obama warns al-Assad against chemical weapons, declares 'the world is watching'. Retrieved November 2, 2013, from CNN World News: http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/03/world/meast/syria-civil-war/
Daoudy, M. (2011). The Arab Spring: Implications for British Policy. London: The Conservative Middle East Council.
Friedman, G. (2011). Syria, Iran and the Balance of Power in the Middle East
Stratfor. Syria, Iran and the Balance of Power in the Middle East. Stratfor Global Intelligence.
The Conservative Middle East Council . (2011). The Arab Spring: Implications for British Policy. London.
Tocci, N. (2013, November 6). Turkey, Europe and the Syrian Crisis: Edging towards a new consensus? Retrieved November 10, 2013, from Aljazeera.com: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/11/turkey-europe-syrian-crisis- edging-towards-new-consensus-201311510320978326.html
