The differences between Syria and Libya are too numerous to be properly examined in this (or any) blog. Some similarities, however, are striking. Until Qaddafi's fall, both countries were led by relatively unpopular despots much more paranoid about losing power than interested in providing for their respective populaces. Both were economically stagnant and would be totally irrelevant if not for their oil wealth.
Their unemployment rates (especially of young males) and their propensity towards using violence against their own people, made these countries ripe for armed revolution. While the UN may not be ready to invade Syria a'la Libya, rest assured that plans are in the works.
The reason the UN has not intervened yet is due to the one striking difference between Syria and Libya: Libya did not have Iran. Any UN intervention will involve (at least covertly) clashes between the West and Iran. Iran's attempts at obtaining nuclear weapons are nearly as much of a deterrent as actually having them. If the UN is going to go after al-Assad, it would be well-advised to do so before Iran can destroy Iraq, Israel, Saudi Arabia, etc. Such is the new calculus of Mid-east diplomacy.
No comments:
Post a Comment