President Bashar Al Assad’s regime in Syria seems to be
gradually losing his bloody fight for survival. Key allies like Russia are
becoming more diffident public in their support of Bashar. China, the other major
source of Bashar’s support, is generally known for unsentimental pragmatism in
international affairs.
The world should pause a bit before joining in the
jubilation over the inevitable and see the future for what it is. While the
nation seems to be heading toward fragmentation into satrapies, a murky
Islamist group Al Nusra has captured the oil-rich town of Al Shahada, near the
city of Hasaka. About 30 Al Nusra fighters, 100 Syrian soldiers and dozens of
civilians were killed as a result of infighting that finally culminated in Al
Shahada’s capture by Islamists, according to the Britain-based Syrian
Observatory for Human Rights.
Optimists cite the Syrian National Council, containing
pro-western moderates, as the country’s saviors. Yet the rebel units are also packed
with an assortment of Islamists. This means that even if Assad’s regime were to
collapse immediately, Syria would continue in a spiral of instability as these
rival groups scramble for space. Regional alliances could then change,
providing further uncertainty.
To be sure, the international community will be around as
the ultimate arbiter. But, true to its nature, the world picks and chooses
where it wants to act. In Syria, in any case, the leading members of the international
community have chosen to remain passive, largely on account of their
ambivalence. The onus is thus on the regional governments. For quite some time,
they have chosen sides in the conflict in keeping with their own interests.
They may now have to unite to prevent the situation from spiraling out of
control.
