FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Syrian War Shows That Some International Problems Don’t Have Practical Solutions

Last week,  The Washington Post reported that President Trump was suspending covert aid to Syrian rebels in their efforts to topple President Bashar al-Assad. While the White House has provided no official comment on the matter, since it’s a classified program, this move had been several months in the making as removing Assad was no longer a priority for the administration. They recognized that continuing to arm the rebels was unlikely to yield any significant results. This is a rare moment of sanity in the American approach to the Middle East, where the government admitted to limitations on its ability to engineer a positive solution out of a highly complex and volatile problem. The harsh reality is that some geopolitical problems don’t have solutions––the Syrian Civil War is a prime example of this.

The move to stop aid to the rebels brought praise from some unusual sources for Trump, such as Tulsi Gabbard, a Democratic Congresswoman from Hawaii. Gabbard and others insist that the weapons provided by the US ultimately fall into the hands of terrorist and extremist groups. Critics, such as Senator Lindsey Graham, charge that ending the program is a capitulation to both Russia and Iran.

The CIA conducted a study in 2013 and found that its many attempts to aid rebels throughout their history has rarely worked. But cutting off aid to the Syrian rebels is a minor issue in the grand scheme of what has been a brutal conflict, as the civil war has pushed the country past a breaking point where a return to normalcy and stability is unlikely. As Denis Dragovic and Richard Iron, an author and 40 year veteran of the British Army respectively, write in The National Interest, “regardless of which faction is eliminated or who is removed from their position of power, the likelihood of stabilizing Syria is low.” They further argue that the “limited capacity of the international community, the conflicting geopolitical interests, and the depth of animosity among people on the ground” means that whether it’s a world without ISIS or Assad, Syria will likely remain an unstable and volatile place.

As Dragovic and Iron emphasize, there is very little that the US and other actors can do to make Syria a fully functioning state again. As the failures of state-building in Iraq and Afghanistan show, building institutions of stable governance––particularly after a devastating war––is tricky business. Political economist Christopher Coyne has argued extensively that successfully importing institutions of governance requires they be designed to complement the existing social norms and informal institutions––habits, beliefs, and common practices––already present. The different groups of people have to figure out the high level art of association that allows them to interact peacefully. As Dragovic and Iron remind us, that goodwill likely doesn’t exist.

Dragovic and Iron recommend that Syria actually be broken up and the borders redrawn, carving out autonomous regions for involved parties to create states of their own. This presents its own challenges, as there is no science to drawing up borders, but they are right that any long term answer in Syria will need to be figured out by the people who live there. It will most likely be painful, and will take more time than anyone would probably like. But it will need to emerge from the people of Syria, not imposed from the outside.

It’s a natural tendency to want to problem solve, particularly when the scale of the problem reaches the level of civil war and humanitarian crisis. But that doesn’t mean that government has the tools to do anything meaningful about it. People fall hostage to what Duke University political science professor Michael Munger has called the “do something problem” – because something is undesirable, we need to do something about it, regardless of the ability to actually fix it or not. And when that prescription fails, it’s because of a lack of resources or political will.

While there are legitimate concerns about the influence of Russia and Iran, the ending of aid to Syrian rebels and the inability to influence the events in Syria more broadly doesn’t show a lack of imagination or political resolve. It highlights that in foreign affairs, much like in domestic issues, sometimes there are no easy, practical solutions to a problem as complex as Syria’s civil war.

Jerrod A. Laber is a writer, former classical singer, and non-profit program director living in Northern Virginia. He is a Young Voices Advocate. Follow him on Twitter @jerrodlaber.

More articles by:
June 19, 2018
John Forte
Stuart Hall and Us
June 18, 2018
Paul Street
Denuclearize the United States? An Unthinkable Thought
John Pilger
Bring Julian Assange Home
Conn Hallinan
The Spanish Labyrinth
Patrick Cockburn
Attacking Hodeidah is a Deliberate Act of Cruelty by the Trump Administration
Gary Leupp
Trump Gives Bibi Whatever He Wants
Thomas Knapp
Child Abductions: A Conversation It’s Hard to Believe We’re Even Having
Robert Fisk
I Spoke to Palestinians Who Still Hold the Keys to Homes They Fled Decades Ago – Many are Still Determined to Return
Steve Early
Requiem for a Steelworker: Mon Valley Memories of Oil Can Eddie
Jim Scheff
Protect Our National Forests From an Increase in Logging
Adam Parsons
Reclaiming the UN’s Radical Vision of Global Economic Justice
Dean Baker
Manufacturing Production Falls in May and No One Notices
Laura Flanders
Bottom-Up Wins in Virginia’s Primaries
Binoy Kampmark
The Anguish for Lost Buildings: Embers and Death at the Victoria Park Hotel
Weekend Edition
June 15, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Dan Kovalik
The US & Nicaragua: a Case Study in Historical Amnesia & Blindness
Jeremy Kuzmarov
Yellow Journalism and the New Cold War
Charles Pierson
The Day the US Became an Empire
Jonathan Cook
How the Corporate Media Enslave Us to a World of Illusions
Ajamu Baraka
North Korea Issue is Not De-nuclearization But De-Colonization
Andrew Levine
Midterms Coming: Antinomy Ahead
Louisa Willcox
New Information on 2017 Yellowstone Grizzly Bear Deaths Should Nix Trophy Hunting in Core Habitat
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Singapore Fling
Ron Jacobs
What’s So Bad About Peace, Man?
Robert Hunziker
State of the Climate – It’s Alarming!
L. Michael Hager
Acts and Omissions: The NYT’s Flawed Coverage of the Gaza Protest
Dave Lindorff
However Tenuous and Whatever His Motives, Trump’s Summit Agreement with Kim is Praiseworthy
Robert Fantina
Palestine, the United Nations and the Right of Return
Brian Cloughley
Sabre-Rattling With Russia
Chris Wright
To Be or Not to Be? That’s the Question
David Rosen
Why Do Establishment Feminists Hate Sex Workers?
Victor Grossman
A Key Congress in Leipzig
John Eskow
“It’s All Kinderspiel!” Trump, MSNBC, and the 24/7 Horseshit Roundelay
Paul Buhle
The Russians are Coming!
Joyce Nelson
The NED’s Useful Idiots
Lindsay Koshgarian
Trump’s Giving Diplomacy a Chance. His Critics Should, Too
Louis Proyect
American Nativism: From the Chinese Exclusion Act to Trump
Stan Malinowitz
On the Elections in Colombia
Camilo Mejia
Open Letter to Amnesty International on Nicaragua From a Former Amnesty International Prisoner of Conscience
David Krieger
An Assessment of the Trump-Kim Singapore Summit
Jonah Raskin
Cannabis in California: a Report From Sacramento
Josh Hoxie
Just How Rich Are the Ultra Rich?
CJ Hopkins
Awaiting the Putin-Nazi Apocalypse
Mona Younis
We’re the Wealthiest Country on Earth, But Over 40 Percent of Us Live in or Near Poverty
Dean Baker
Not Everything Trump Says on Trade is Wrong
James Munson
Trading Places: the Other 1% and the .001% Who Won’t Save Them
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail