"What’s the Deal With Syria?" by Megan Assman

            If you have turned your TV or radio to any news station lately, there is a good chance that you have heard at least a mention of the crisis in Syria.  I have been extremely intrigued about what all the fuss is about so when my professor in my Governments of the World class said that we had a chance to do a blog assignment, I decided that it would be a great opportunity to learn more about an important historical event that is currently happening. I had heard bits and pieces of the story, but I feel that unless a topic is not thoroughly researched, an opinion cannot be formed.

As Syria marks the one-year anniversary of the country’s uprising against the regime of President Bashar Assad, an estimated 7,500 people have died since the regime launched a brutal crackdown on protesters. Although Syrian activists have improved their protesting techniques of leaking photos and videos of the violence, horrible deaths, torture, and broken families to the mainstream media in the outside world, Syria’s future is still extremely uncertain.

Syria was a latecomer to the Arab Spring, a series of protests, demonstrations, and riots in the Arab world that began in December of 2010.  When Syria initially joined the Arab Spring movement the protesters did not demand that President Bashar Assad resign from his position, but instead they focused on voicing their opinion on their lack of basic freedoms that the citizens of the country were experiencing.  Security forces responded to these protests with excessively brutal force.  They shot tear gas and live ammunition into the crowd and ended up killing and severely wounding several protesters.  As anger and unrest grew due to the deaths of civilian’s, protests spread to other cities.  Assad, trying to calm the citizens, offered a series of new policies.  Officials who participated in violence would be fired, some political prisoners would be released, and the overall welfare of the citizens would be better epitomized.  The regime, however, tried to claim its innocence and blame foreign agents for the unrest in Syria.  

The violence in Syria reached a whole new level at the end of 2011.  As many as 40 people were being killed every day and the outrage continued to grow against security forces.  Loosely organized members of the Free Syrian Army staged attacks against security forces.  In December and January, two separate bombings took place in Syria’s capital, Damascus, and dozens of people were killed.  The regime blamed Al Qaeda in an effort to get public support of the regime’s crackdown and they did not stop there.  In February 2012, Assad’s regime launched an assault on the city of Homs.  Hundreds of innocent people were massacred over the course of several weeks as bombs and rockets rained down on the city.

After the events in Homs, many believed the country was destined for a civil war.  The majority of Syria’s population are Sunni Muslims, but there are also a significant number of Christian, Shia, and Alawi groups. President Assad just happens to be part of the Alawi group and Alawites “just happen” to hold many key positions in government. 

International response to the terrible events in Syria has been harsh to say the least.  President Barack Obama has called on President Assad to step down from his position and end the crisis and the chief of the United Nations, Ban Ki-Moon, has described what happened to the citizens of Homs as “unacceptable before humanity.”  The President of France, Nicholas Sarkozy, has called Assad a murderer and many other leaders across the world have said the same.  The U.N. Security Council proposed a resolution to the problem by resignation of President Assad and 13 of the Security Council’s 15 members approved, but this decision was vetoed by China and Russia. 

I am interested to see what the future holds for Syria.  Writing this blog piece has been an awesome way for me to learn more about the crisis in Syria through research and I hope that it has been an interesting read for you as well.

Sources:

http://miami.cbslocal.com/2013/09/05/understanding-the-crisis-in-syria/

http://www.usatoday.com/interactive/2759693/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23863012

 

On 9/11, Al Qaeda & Attacks on US Consulate in Benghazi, by Michael Werner

            George Santayana said, "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it."  In fact, that history may not have occurred that long ago.  Americans remember September 11, 2001.  The events of that date are etched in the memories of all most all Americans.  They have been recorded in the written achieves, so all can draw upon them, remember them, and learn from them.   It was on this date that Al Qaeda attached America.  They high jacked four planes.  Two planes were flown into the World Trade Center buildings in New York, one crashed into the Pentagon, and one crashed in Pennsylvania.  Over 3,000 people were killed.  Many believe that Al Qaeda has again attached America.  Not on its own soil, as in 2001, but in Benghazi, Libya.  On September 11, 2012 the American Consulate in Benghazi, Libya was attacked.  History has repeated itself.

The attack occurred when heavily armed Islamic militants entered the consulate compound and fired upon and set fire to the consulate.  The attack resulted in the death of four American citizens.  While this number is significantly lower than the number that died in 2001, they died, it was an attack, and it is now being considered an act of terrorism.

In defense of history not repeating itself, the U.S. government initially implied the attack was a grassroots riot response to the American made anti-Muslim video.  Later the State Department indicated it was conducted by a militia associated with Al Qaeda’s branch in North Africa.  This was supported by Libya’s president Mohamed Magariaf.  He was of strong belief the attack was carried out by an Al Qaeda group hiding in Libya.  He supported this belief based on the sophistication of the attack and the alignment with the date of the original attack.  Based on recent media reports and comments out of the State Department, the Al Qaeda terrorist attack, not a grassroots riot, is the supported conclusion.

This raises the question; what was, or maybe the better question is what was not, learned from the first attack?  It has been well documented that there were warning signs ahead of both of these attacks.  At issue is whether or not those warning were credible.  We know that the Libyan Ambassador had been requesting additional security.  Some of those requests were met, but others were not.  Certainly, history leads to a path of landing with too much security.  So, why weren’t all the security requests met?  Has time alone caused a loosening of security?  Were the warning not considered credible?   Have we learned from history on American soil, but not on our overseas embassy locations?

Since September 11, 2001, it is a new world.  The history of this day cannot be forgotten.  The relaxing of what we learned from this day will cause history to repeat itself again.  When it comes to terrorism, let’s remember the words of George Santayana, “Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”