|
07 Feb 2012
Away from the potential outcome of the UN Security
Council meeting on the Syrian revolution, there are
many reports and much evidence regarding the collapse
of Bashar al-Assad's rule, with many people
considering this to be inevitable. The Americans are
the latest to say so - on more than one level - and
the White House now believes that the fall of al-Assad
is certain, and that his forces are losing control of
large parts of the country. Observers may be surprised at the volume of
information that has become available recently about
scenes of clashes between the Free Syrian Army [FSA]
and al-Assad's forces around the capital Damascus,
with some clashes even taking place close to the
presidential palace. What a surprise it must have been
for some when the "al-Arabiya" satellite channel
yesterday showed a live broadcast of the blowing up of
an oil pipeline in Homs, as well as extensive footage
of fire-fights taking place in Baba Amro recorded with
professional television cameras, which suggests that
the al-Assad regime has lost control of large parts of
Syria. We must note here that with Aleppo now entering
the sphere of the revolution, it seems that almost
half of Syria is now outside the control of al-Assad.
The statements issued by FSA commander Colonel Riad
al-Asaad also support this information; al-Asaad told
Agence France-Presse [AFP] yesterday that the morale
of government troops is extremely low and "that's why
they are bombing indiscriminately, killing men, women
and children". The FSA commander also stressed that
"fifty percent of Syrian territory is no longer under
the control of the regime". We can add the statements issued by US Director of
National Intelligence James Clapper to this. Speaking
before a US Senate Intelligence Committee session,
Clapper said "I do not see how he [al-Assad] can
sustain his rule of Syria" adding "I personally
believe it's a question of time." Therefore, the information and statements above, in
addition to the recent Kurdish move demanding
international intervention in Syria to put an end to
the massacres and violence being perpetrated by the
al-Assad regime, as well as Iran's most recent warning
– issued by [Foreign Minister Ali Akbar] Salehi – of a
"vacuum happen[ing] suddenly in Syria", in addition to
the clear escalation of violence on the part of the
al-Assad regime, following in the footsteps of Gaddafi
when he attacked Benghazi before the UN Security
Council meeting at the time, tells us that the al-Assad
regime is dying, and its collapse is to be expected.
However, the question that we have long put forward
and repeated is: what is the cost of the fall of al-Assad?
The answer, unfortunately, is that the cost of the
fall of al-Assad will be great, and this will be a
cost that is paid by the unarmed Syrian people, as
long as there is no regional or international movement
towards the imposition of buffer and no-fly zones, and
explicit recognition of the Syrian National Council [SNC].
Only then will conditions be created to quickly bring
the curtain down on the al-Assad regime. The most
important thing today is to reduce the size of the
losses in the Syrian ranks. Some may ask: Is military intervention required?
The answer is: Why shouldn't there be military
intervention in Syria? The international community
didn't just intervene in Libya, it also intervened in
Yugoslavia, in the heart of Europe! Tariq Alhomayed is the Editor-in-Chief of Asharq
Al-Awsat, the youngest person to be appointed that
position. He holds a BA degree in Media studies from
King Abdul Aziz University in Jeddah, and has also
completed his Introductory courses towards a Master's
degree from George Washington University in Washington
D.C. He is based in London. |