The pieces seem to be aligning at least for the threat of US military intervention, which could apply additional pressure to Russia and China to alter their position on the UN Security Council.
Most of the major developments of Geneva II didn’t actually happen at the negotiation table, but in Washington DC.
On the second day of the peace conference the US announced that it would begin supplying small arms to the FSA, and for the first time, supplying anti tank weaponry. The escalation in weapons supply shows direct military support to the FSA for the first time in six months.
Mid way through the conference, the US senate met and discussed the real threat of terrorist organizations preparing for potential US attacks while training at new camps in Syria. This is the same position the US government used to help justify intervention in Afghanistan, a legitimate terrorist threat is identified, training locations discovered, and military action justified to stop the threat of a terrorist strike.
Assad has left the door open for escalating US pressure as Damascus missed his deadline for delivering chemical weapons for disposal to the port in Latakia Syria. US policy of intervention based on the use of Chemical weapons by Assad, had been placed on hold, allowing time time to dispense the chemical weaponry. Now that the deadline has come and gone, the UN has a sticky situation, what intervention can be used to enforce the destruction of chemical weapons? With Russia staunchly supporting Assad while holding veto power, the US may be forced to find friends willing to intervene outside of UN approval.
As we read the tea leaves, it looks as though the US may be able to justify some type of military intervention at least special forces, to strike terrorist organizations inside Syria, based on their threat to the US. In doing so, the US could indirectly strengthen the position of the FSA, a more moderate group who has fought two fronts, one against Assad and the other agains Islamist extremists. If the FSA is strengthened with weapons and their ability to fight a one front war, it could weaken the position of the Syrian government in Damascus.
Disclaimer: The comments expressed in this column may not represent the political position of World Compassion. This commentary is an editorial and the comments expressed may not necessarily reflect the views of World Compassion management. World Compassion believes that all parties involved in the conflict need the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. As an organization World Compassion makes every effort to reach those involved in the conflict with the gospel, and distributes humanitarian aid without discrimination.
