Syria is sliding rapidly into chaos. The supply of weapons to the opposition could only make matters worse, yet the Prime Minister seems to be -contemplating it.
We have misjudged the situation from the start. From the early days of the crisis, two years ago, we rode to the rescue with our rhetoric. We were all for the forces of democracy and for the downfall of a ruthless dictator. Syria was another green shoot of the Arab Spring. A Syrian National Council was to be formed, on the pattern of the Libyan version, to be the vehicle for our democratic ambitions. We were to be, in that agonising cliché, ‘on the right side of history’.
The problem was that this was largely hot air. It bore no relation to the realities of power in Syria or to the international forces that play on that country, long a political keystone in the region. In particular, it took no account of the deep divisions within Syrian society. Few people with serious knowledge of Syria supported the idea of regime change. The likely outcome was chaos. The certain victims were the Syrian people themselves.
That is precisely what is now happening. Bashar al-Assad, whose head we seem to have been seeking, is of no more than symbolic importance. He would be replaced by an Alawite -general, most unlikely to be to our taste. The Alawites do not just have blood on their hands, they are up to their elbows in it. They and their supporters know that to lose power would be to face a very unpleasant end for themselves and their families.
Others are passive supporters. They believe, correctly, that any successor regime will be Muslim Brethren at best, jihadist at worst. For the minorities, such as the Christians, Kurds and Druze, the devil they know is to be preferred.
Comments
Join the debate for just £1 a month
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for £3.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just £1 a monthAlready a subscriber? Log in