Special Offer!Use code first15 and
Get 15% off your first order
Table of Contents
Several measures have been taken in the course of attempting to throttle the regime. This has been done both economically and politically. Such a case is freezing the process of Syria’s membership to the Arab League. However, there still remains the prospect of a martial intervention. As outlined by the Syrian National Council policy, a military intervention may be allowed as an open prospect but only as an option of a broader and steady approach that gives precedence to a non-military approach.
In case NATO and the United States provide air strikes as well as arms respectively, the Syrian Opposition may be in a better position of ousting the Assad regime. Though the kind of intervention is not outlined, a probable no-fly-zone, as well as a buffer zone at the borders of Turkey, would be the most possible progress. In addition, several countries would rally behind NATO’s intervention and would have no issues in funding the forces campaign.
However, this approach needs to be thoroughly planned and prepared as the intervention of the military forces may significantly increase civilian casualties. Furthermore, it may lead to civil war and accomplish the government’s false claims of roving fortified gangs. On the other hand, the resolution of Assad’s regime to military force may indicate that it is quite difficult to bring down his regime by means of diplomacy and civil confrontation. Due to this, an external intervention proves to be necessary. This may aid in breaking the stalemate and altering the whole situation in favor of the rebellion. In addition, aerial assaults, targeting vital military locations across the nation, would enhance the defection of numerous army officers. Consequently, these strikes would compel the military out of cities and towns. In turn, this would create more room and space for larger groups of protestors.
Even though there are set hurdles such as Syria’s affiliation with Russia, China, and Iran, countries ponder that the USA and other UNO member states ought to assist the opposition to oust Assad’s regime. This could be achieved by providing arms to the Syrian opposition as well as using NATO airstrikes. This would enable the rest of the world to view the United States as attempting to offer assistance. In turn, the opposition would be granted an opportunity to reorganize themselves into a more formidable unit. On the other hand, this would vividly portray to the rest of the world’s oppressive governments that their time has come to an end. Despite the fact that a military involvement is not probable, its approval designates a considerable enthusiasm from some individuals in the council leadership. They would promote and be complicit in harmonizing an administered changeover with the United States as well as its local cronies in case Assad’s regime ultimately falls.
In the beginning, the law was envisioned to check the political parties. It was perceived that the responsibilities of parties included both power circulation and power sharing in governance. Nonetheless, this was changed and the proposal that there should be power circulation is removed. The ‘circulation of power’ could be comprehended to involve a very precise transition of power from one political party to another. This would be based on ballot votes. Its removal has left an unclear proclamation on ‘participation’ and ‘contribution’ in politics. It does not articulate the issue of power transfer as well as power sharing as part of the administration’s responsibilities.
Due to this, the institution of a united coalition between the Syrian opposition’s outstanding factions may prove to be very vital in this war. Their purpose would be to jointly work towards the eliminating of Assad’s regime. The coalition would also be seen as a basis for the progression of national council delegates both outside and within Syria. This would also allow the local coordinating committees to participate in the running of the new regime. With regard to the aforementioned issues, it is necessary to assist opposition in the fight against Assad’s regime. The death of civilians is on the rise and it seems like the regime is not going to become less rigid by itself. Support ought to be offered on humanitarian grounds.