With sudden shift in Obama Administration “belief” on Syria’s putative chemical weapons use has fueled more speculation about the possibility of a US military intervention in Syria, either through air strikes or an invasion.
But even nations openly backing the rebels in the ongoing Syrian Civil War are balking at the ramifications of US involvement on the rebel side, seeing a US deployment as likely to fuel spillover violence and rising regional sectarianism.
There was a time when the reaction may have been different, but as the war has grown and the rebellion has taken on an increasingly Islamist tone, nations like Jordan and Turkey see a lot more to lose from a US war in Syria. This isn’t a stable region to begin with, and lingering anger at the US occupation of Iraq would come rushing back into view across the Middle East should they move into Syria.
Even Britain seems to be balking at the situation, with reports that Army Chief of Staff Gen. Sir David Richards warning David Cameron that a “limited” intervention in Syria would quickly expand into an all-out war. The warning echoes similar testimony from Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel to Congress recently, cautioning them that they “better be damned sure” before they commit the US to any conflicts in Syria.
Last 5 posts by Jason Ditz
- Trump Wants High-Profile Meeting With Putin at G20 Summit - June 26th, 2017
- House Spending Bill Threatens to Suspend Nuclear Treaty With Russia - June 26th, 2017
- Bahrain Accuses Qatar of Seeking 'Military Escalation' - June 26th, 2017
- White House Appears to Be Planning Attack on Assad - June 26th, 2017
- Top Senator Blocks Gulf Arms Sales Over Qatar Crisis - June 26th, 2017