What You Need To Know About The Crisis In Syria - Fashion News

Photo: REX USA/The Times / Esa Alexander/Rex While the conflict in Syria has been raging for two years, the situation has come to a head on the international stage in the past week. Many of us have been following the news with horror, and we realize there are still many people with questions, including our own friends and coworkers. A civil war — especially in the context of a larger uprising within the Middle East — is a complex, multi-faceted crisis situation, but below, we've fleshed out what we feel are the most important parts. Read on to brush up, answer your burning questions, or just to figure out what the heck everyone's been talking about.

The Background

The current civil war in Syria officially began during the 2011 Arab Spring protests, but unrest had been brewing among its citizens for sometime. Bashar al-Assad's presidency is the culmination of four decades of reign by his family, which has been causing tension within the Sunni-majority country (Assad is a member of the Alawite religious group). When Libya and Egypt staged uprisings to overthrow dictatorial leaders, the fever caught on in Syria as well. Citizens formed peaceful protests against the Assad regime, but the government responded with violence, killing civilians and sparking further retaliation within the country that slowly became radicalized.

At first the conflict broke into two basic groups: The government forces (led by Assad) and civilians who resented the political regime. Citizens began to arm themselves (helped at first by army defectors and the Turkish government) and organized as the Free Syrian Army. However, over time the FSA became dominated by Islamist extremists (including some affiliated with Al Qaeda), bolstered by Sunni rulers in Saudi Arabia and Qatar. The rebels, as the overarching group is now referred to, slowly split into fractured groups, with the more radical fighters taking over areas to the north and east of Damascus, and the more secular fighters holding court in the southern suburbs.

At this point in the fighting — which has consisted of everything from widespread shelling to calculated sniper shootouts — over 100,000 are dead (according to estimates from the United Nations) and millions more have been displaced as they seek shelter in Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey. Refugees have caused tensions to rise in these neighboring countries, and violence is starting to overflow across the Syrian border as well. The humanitarian crisis has become even more intensified, as provisions in the country dwindle and the escalating warfare makes it nearly impossible to bring supplies into the country.

The Latest Developments

Last week, the Syrian government crossed what many believe to be a "red line," launching a chemical attack on a suburb of Damascus. Not only did the attack allegedly kill hundreds of civilians (including scores of children), but it violated international law. CNN released disturbing video of the immediate aftermath of the attack, showing the horrifying effects of what is allegedly nerve gas wreaking havoc on residents of the Ghouta district and prompting international leaders to send a UN envoy of investigators to the site.

Many political leaders (including Barack Obama) were initially hesitant to jump to conclusions about the attack, especially as the UN investigators struggled to obtain solid evidence of nerve gas (the Syrian government initially banned the envoy from the site of the attack). However, recent confirmation of the use of chemical weapons has escalated the discussion of military intervention.

Several countries, including the U.K., have urged the use of force against the Assad regime, claiming that failing to intervene will only encourage Syria (and, possibly, other countries) to continue to launch similar attacks. Russia, which has been one of the Syrian government's strongest allies, has warned that any attack from outside forces could further destabilize the civil war or prompt retaliatory attacks (nearby Israel would be most at risk). President Obama has deplored the chemical attacks and vowed to take action, but the United States has been slow to make any hard-edged decisions. The White House has admitted in several statements that the Assad regime's actions were unforgivable, but urged the thoughtful consideration of every option. In short, the U.S. prefers to consider the long game before committing to military intervention.

What To Expect

As of press time, a final decision on a response to the chemical-weapons attack is still looming. Prime Minister David Cameron, of Great Britain, announced plans to introduce a resolution authorizing the use of force at a United Nations Security Council meeting. International law requires approval for any military action, and despite the protests from Vladimir Putin and the rest of the Russian government, intervention seems imminent. However, if there is no consensus from the UN, there is always the option of sending in coalition forces — according to The New York Times, Britain appears to be laying the groundwork for a U.S.-led team.

If a military attack does occur, there's a very little chance it would be a full-scale "boots on the ground" operation (think the war in Afghanistan) or even an attempt to oust Assad (as with Libya). Instead, any action would most likely target the military units that launched the chemical attacks, in an attempt to destabilize or halt more attacks. The most important thing to remember in this situation is that Syria is an extremely unstable country without a clear "good" side — while the Assad regime has no doubt committed the most grievous crimes, the extremist groups among the rebels also pose a threat. In the end, the main goal is to protect the country's innocent civilians and prevent further death and destruction.

Read More