Last Thursday, President Obama made a long awaited decision to intervene in the civil war that has been taking place in Syria over the past two years. It was confirmed that the United States will provide arms to the rebel forces battling the Syrian Government led by President Bashar al-Assad. Although the administration claimed that it was because of the Assad regime's use of chemical weapons, it is more likely that the decision was driven by a desire to prevent the violence from seeping into surrounding countries. Some politicians, however, chastised the President for not acting quickly enough.
History could help explain why Obama has waited a significant amount of time to take a proactive stance in the conflict that has claimed the lives of more than 90,000 people. First and most obvious, the recent foreign policy quagmires of the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars should give the administration a great deal of reason to wander cautiously in regards to intervention in the Middle East. Likewise, last time the United States was faced with a similar opportunity to arm rebels in such a fashion was Operation Cyclone in the 1980s, in which the U.S. Government provided arms and financial aid to the Afghan Mujahideen. While this did help Afghanistan to throw off oppressive Soviet rule, it inadvertently allowed for the later consolidation of Al-Qaeda power.
President Obama is right to help the Syrian people fight for their freedom from a destructive despot, but a degree of wariness is necessary when dealing with such a volatile situation. The extremist groups present on both sides echo an atmosphere similar to the one in Afghanistan that was present thirty years ago.
No comments:
Post a Comment