How has the active responses from outside involvement challenged the resolution to the Syrian conflict?
The current Syrian crisis is an intrastate conflict which is slowly turning into a precursor of an interstate conflict. The crisis has many causes, one in particular being the 2011 Arab Spring. The Arab Spring is a people uprising against their own non-democratic governments within the Middle East. It began in Tunisia, to Egypt, Libya, Yemen and now Syria. As a result, Syria has been split between ethnicities, the Sunnis and the Shiites. However it is also a conflict between government and people, naturally because of the Shiite biased government and the Sunni majority civilians. The al-Assad government is comprised of Shiite race, favouring their own people who are the minority of the population and creating unrest in Syria. Syria had undergone an economic depression before the uprising due to global economic “bust” and the government being unable to respond to the majority of its people’s needs. Consequently, because of this political unrest, global actors have responded to the Syrian intrastate conflict.
State actors have involved their selves in the Syrian conflict in different ways and for different reasons. For example, USA and some of their Western allies have posed economic sanctions as their first attempt to settle the conflict. However, the Syrian government were not effected as much as they hoped because of their economic downfall they were already in. Russia, another powerful state, is a strong economic ally of Syria. Since the Russia and US Cold War, each state still sees each other as a hostile state. Consequently, the two states tend to have different ideologies opposite to the other. To protect Syria from US intervention, Russia along with China has used their VETO power in the United Nations Security Council to make the other solution of intervention almost impossible. China does this as part of their non-intervention policy. It states...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document