In the historical record, we find that peoples who in the past did suffer from U.S. inaction have not had a track record of striking America. Have the East Timorese taken revenge for their decades-long subjugation to Indonesia, which happened under America's watch and tacit blessing in 1975? Has there been an instance of Iraqi Shia terror within the continental United States to avenge the U.S. decision not to support their uprising against Saddam Hussein in 1991? The reality is that those who wish to cause America harm will find whatever excuse or pretext to justify their attacks.
There are important and reasoned arguments for why the United States ought to intervene in Syria. This, however, is not one of them.
Nikolas K. Gvosdev, a senior editor at The National Interest, is a professor of national-security studies at the U.S. Naval War College. The views expressed are entirely his own.
Comments
Brilliant article. McCain's jungle fever strikes again.
McCain is incapable of learning. How grateful were Iraqis? Libyans? Egyptians? Afghans? Turks? Iran? America has poured too many resources into these countries and invested a lot. As a senator with a very long experience of dealing with the Middle should know that the teacher is just saying that to prompt America to do what he wants, i.e. to do his dirty laundry. It makes no sense to talk about hurting America rather than Iran or Russia. So, the teacher is either inherently anti-American or he is trying to push America to do his chores for him.I refuse to believe that the senator is so naïve. He should know that America will be cursed 5 minutes after it overthrows Assad and, that America will be blamed for all that goes wrong in Syria!!! Syria is a mess and it will get worse. If America interferes it will be blamed for everything. And, it would also have been blamed if it had interfered earlier. The US does not need to take sides in the sectarian war. It can get closer with parties from both sides and this will give the US tremendous leverage.To stop Syria’s civil war the administration must focus on making the groups that support Bashar Al-Assad feel safe to stop supporting the status quo and accept change. Therefore, self-determination must be a pillar of any strategy dealing with the revolutions in the ME in general and in Syria in particular given Syria’s diversity if, long term stability is what we seek; i.e. the Kurds must be recognized and given an autonomous region and, the Alewites must also have an autonomous region. Other minorities, judging by where they stand today, will chose to live with the Alewites. Both alewites and kurds could be allies of the US and, they could even be allies of Israel to balance against their newly found enemies. This will also keep Syrians occupied and, will prevent them from stirring problems. The only hope for a soft landing and lasting peace is: A Syrian Union and the right of Self-determination granted to Syria’s components. This must be the US administration’s strategy. Otherwise fundamentalist regimes will form the new geopolitical reality in the ME and it would be very difficult to check, contain, and balance against emerging hostile regimes in the ME.