Daily Times

We have been here before. US President Donald Trump’s missile strike on the Shayrat Syrian Arab Air Force base in Syria has a familiar ring to it. Faced with historically low ratings and a series of setbacks in domestic politics, the US head of the state has done what his predecessors did before him: find a war to wage, appease the hawks and the military machine, and present an image of a decisive president. Critics have termed this offensive as violating international law. Besides, these strikes were conducted without the authorisation of the Congress.

Assad’s brutalities against his own people are well known and have attracted global condemnation. The conflict in Syria has left nearly 400,000 people dead, and at least one out of three Syrians is displaced. The alleged use of chemical weapons comes as the latest tragedy. But let us not forget that the US has been involved in Syrian conflict way before this episode.

Obama was criticised for not acting in Syria. Yet his administration was responsible for dropping over 12,000 bombs on Syria in 2016 alone. Advocates for US intervention cite Islamic State or Daesh and its power as the main reason. But the reality is that the aerial strikes have little impact and, if anything, Russia and Iran have been helping Assad regime to take on the Daesh. There is another reason to be sceptical about President Trump’s newfound concern for Syria. He is the same leader who wants to prevent the Syrian refugees from entering the US.

Chemical weapons may have been used in Idlib, especially since the Syrian army has shrunk over time and the regime is struggling to control the entire country. But evidence for that has to be fool proof as strikes involve real people and are not part of ongoing video gaming. As seen during the Iraq war, the record of US and British intelligence agencies has been abysmal on that front.

Idlib is also the area where rebel forces are strong. And so are the Al Qaeda affiliates. Once again, the murky nature of conflict is bound to strengthen the same Al Qaeda that the US has been trying to eliminate for sixteen years. More worrying is the prospect of innocent civilians who may be killed if the strikes continue and other global powers such as Russia jump in to protect the Assad regime.

Reports suggest that Syrians living close to strike zones are in a state of panic. Since 2015, the US had turned a blind eye to the reckless bombing of Yemen by its key ally Saudi Arabia where thousands of civilians including children have died. Sadly, Yemen does not stir the conscience of international community; neither does Pakistan for that matter.

Though the recent strikes have been termed as symbolic, the scope and nature of US intervention will unfold in the days to come. This is the time to remind international power brokers that expanding the Syrian conflict will only escalate violence, extremism, and human despair. The Syrian war needs to end – as opposed to being expanded towards a disastrous and uncertain endgame.