A Call to Intervention is Trickier than it Seems

In Consequences of US Intervention in Syria, a blog post written by Mustafa Hussein the Syrian war crisis is explored and possible outcomes outlined by possible actions that the United States government could take. It is clear at the beginning of the article that the conflict in Syria is not one that could be easily deciphered as black and white; it involves an intricate number of parties and groups. Each group fighting for a differentiating cause and only forming alliances when their similarity pertains to their belonging in the Shia or Sunni faction. 

As stated in the article, the conflict involves groups such as President Bashar al-Assad governmental forces, Hezbollah (representing Shia Muslims) forces, Iranian forces, ISIS, the Islamic Front, Al-Nustra Front and other groups (representing Sunni Muslims). All of these are inside groups that seek to penetrate into the Syrian society and eventually take over the country. 

What the author speaks about in the end, is something that perhaps could have been elaborated more upon. For the role that the United States takes in this present crisis occurring in Syria is of great magnitude. Hussein clearly states that the two options available have down sides, however the United States’ action is vital to the termination of this war and therefore intervention in Syria should be made.

A point he failed to consider is that intervention won’t be easy. If the United States were to favor president’s al-Assad forces and fight off all the rebel forces, it would have to consider a Russian alliance and relation. Not only that, but also keep in mind wether al-Assad’s actions as a leader are actions that the U.S. government would want to partake in. And if the mass center force defeats ISIS and the Sunni-affiliated front, then what guarantees that al-Assad would be able to prevent future disputes from happening. Sponsoring a mass genocide and not proving to lead a country in crisis doesn’t speak much for Bashar al-Assad’s capability of recovering the state of a failing country. If Instead the United States government were to aid the rebel groups that are fighting al-Assad's regime and terrorist groups, it would find itself in a situation at odds with personal interests. It would escalate tensions in the world, since Iran is supporting Syrian government and ultimately create a greater divide between the people of the middle east and people of the western hemisphere.

U.S intervention is vital to the current chaos, however intervention should not be made in a hurried notion. Therefore instead of emphasizing in the groups fighting this civil war, Mustafa should have focused more on the long term effects that each decision would create. Personally speaking the U.S. government would have a better, and neutral stance, if it were to fight along al-Assad's government and Russian forces. That alliance would lessen expectations from the Syrian government to provide all the force and artillery needed, it would guarantee a coalition that would benefit the world in any future conflict and eventually would help diminish radical groups that terrorize the world.