COLUMN: From The Left
The U.S. has always been a very prudent nation. Very rarely in history have we been involved in international affairs when it did not serve our own self-interest. This is why I am baffled that we haven’t intervened in Syria.
Most news-reading Americans have watched the rebellion in Syria unfold with only a passing interest. Truthfully, it’s easy to see why Americans aren’t interested in getting involved with the conflict; we’re a war-weary country, and Syria simply seems inconsequential to our self-interest.
In reality, however, the U.S. is squandering a critical opportunity to shape the future in its favor. No more than a quick glance at its geography makes it clear that of all the Arab Spring revolts, Syria’s may be the most consequential for the U.S.
Syria is a fairly substantial country in the troubled Middle East. It borders Israel to the southwest and Iraq to the east – two countries of slight interest to the U.S. Just a stone’s throw away sits the defiant country of Iran.
The U.S. has a golden opportunity to plant democratic seeds in a turbulent region. While it may be a stretch expecting Syria to be friendly to Israel, it’s certainly possible in helping establish a tolerant nation. Not only would this help ease regional tensions, it would undermine some of the support Iran gets for its aggression toward Israel and the U.S. Additionally, wouldn’t it be wonderful to give Iraq an example of a stable transitioning government right next door?
I’m not suggesting full-scale Iraq-style intervention in Syria, but it is clear the U.S. can roll back some of the regional tensions by guiding Syria to a more stable and liberalized government. What’s more is the U.S. can do this at a relatively low cost without putting any boots on the ground.
We need to start orchestrating NATO involvement. Syria doesn’t need a full-scale invasion; they need a little bit of air firepower, arms support and tactical advising.
NATO is crucial to taking action in Syria. Not only does it relieve much of the burden from the U.S. because other countries will share the load, but it empowers the other members of NATO for the future.
This same tactic of joint intervention through NATO was utilized in Libya and was largely successful. It possibly signaled a shift from a U.S.-led NATO to a multilateral one. Empowering other countries in NATO relieves us of our savior complex and perceived obligation to police the world.
To sum it up, Syrian intervention would provide greater security to Israel, remove leverage from Iran, help establish democracy in the region and empower our NATO allies. Perhaps even more important than these advantages is that Syrians actually want our help.
Because Syrian rebels want international aid means it won’t turn into another catastrophe reminiscent of Iraq. So long as we play the role of a guiding hand rather than an invading force, Syria can transform relatively painlessly into a reasonably liberalized, U.S.-friendly, Arab-run democracy in the Middle East. Wouldn’t that be a novelty?
Sadly, our politicians seem to have no interest in such an obviously advantageous maneuver. Then again, perhaps Obama is only waiting for it to get closer to election time.