The Syrian conflict is getting more bloody and complex with each passing day. Its complexity is due to the particular domestic political compulsions of Syria and the conflicting national interests of major regional powers. The international factor adds to existing intricacies due to the U.S. commitment to the security of Israel and the need for uninterrupted oil supplies from the Middle East.

Syria had always been divided. The takeover of the country by Hafez al Assad in 1970 helped to restore peace but it could not heal the deeper wounds of mutual animosities. Syrian domestic discontent increased with the arrival of Bashar al-Assad in 2000 after the death of his father, as the new leader failed to understand the increasing demands of a representative government.

The Arab Spring arrived in Damascus in March 2011, with protests demanding wider political reforms and the release of political prisoners. The Syrian government failed to deal with the protestors as the agitation was not solely a localized affair. The Arab Spring was manipulated through social networks and funded by Assad's rivals. The conflict became a civil war which has displaced over two million people and killed thousands more.

The role of regional countries was particularly disturbing. Instead of trying to solve the issue, they tried to fish in the troubled waters by promoting their vested interests. Saudi Arabia, ruled by the autocratic Wahabi-Sunni dynasty, was opposed to the socialist and Shiite rulers of Syria. The Saudis were never reconciled to the reality of Arab socialist Baa'th Party which ruled over Iraq and Syria. They colluded with the U.S. to topple Saddam Hussein, a diehard Baa'thist and follower of Sunni Islam like the Saudis. They are playing the same game in Syria and trying to stage a coup through war to replace the last socialist ruler of the Arab world.. By overthrowing Assad, Saudi Arabic wants to break the so called "Shiite Highway" from Herat in Afghanistan to Iran, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon.

The U.S. also shares this interest but for different reasons. Washington wants to disrupt Shiite connections due to the threat posed by countries like Iran.

The regional situation gets more complex, with Saudi rivalry with Iran on the one hand and the Turkish and Syrian enmity on the other. The Arabs in general and the Saudi monarchs in particular do not share the Iranian views on regional and international politics. They consider the Iranians outsiders and a threat to their identity. Iran, as a Shiite majority country and a regional power adds to the confrontational political problems. Interestingly, the US also holds similar views about Tehran. When Iran supported Syrian regime, the Saudi – U.S. alliance formed naturally. Turkey has historical problems with Damascus which were galvanized due to the recent civil unrest and border incidents involving the deaths of Turkish civilians.

With this complex array of rivalries and competing interests, the looming U.S. attack would have devastating consequences not only for Syrian domestic politics but for the entire Middle Eastern region. Islamist groups fighting against the Syrian government have also opposed the looming strike. They have also accused the U.S. of using the strike as an opportunity to "target" jihadist groups battling Assad's regime. "If the West tries to take advantage of the situation to slaughter revolutionaries and jihadists, the Muslim world is ready to strike back," a member of the al-Qaeda-linked Islamic State of Iraq and Syria told a Western news agency. It is also believed that the so called Syrian National Coalition recognized by the West and Gulf states as the sole representative body is not a monolithic group and the U.S. attack may split it into factions. These groups have the example of Iraqi occupation by the U.S. where hundreds and thousands of people have been killed and the radical Islamists have become stronger, while the unrest in the country remains largely uncontrolled.

The international community is divided over whether to attack Syria. Russia and China have opposed the assault.

It seems that the deteriorating Syrian conflict will draw a new battle line among regional countries. It will increase sectarian tensions, cause a regional imbalance of power, destroy any possible power parity between Israel and the Arab world and unleash groups of Islamist militants to attack local rulers and the U.S. and Western interests.

The writer is a senior Pakistani journalist and columnist. He can be reached at sajjaadd@gmail.com

Related

• Has the US learned a lesson from Iraq?
• Imperialism and chemical weapons in Syria
• Syria intervention without UN mandate unlawful
• NATO missiles deployed at Syria border
• Iraq opposes Western military action on Syria

Go to Forum >>0 Comment(s)