Syria: The Growing Proxy War in the Middle East

By Tyler Hooper

On Thursday, June 13, the White House announced that it will now provide military weapons and supplies to Syrian rebels. The announcement came with claims by the Obama administration that they have found evidence of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime using chemical weapons against rebel forces, which is strictly prohibited by international conventions. Mr. Rhodes, a deputy national security adviser to President Obama, claimed that Assad’s forces have used the nerve agent sarin gas, but Russia was quick to question the authenticity of the evidence causing tensions over Syria to flare.

The declaration comes at a time when ethnic violence in Iraq is on the rise and the uprisings in Turkey have intensified, worsening the already volatile state of the Middle East. With regards to Syria, the two-year-old conflict, which is currently showing no signs of being peacefully resolved, has taken over 90,000 lives and has attracted international attention. Over the last year, both foreign and regional powers have become involved in the Syrian conflict, which has often spilt over its borders, causing conflict with neighboring states.

Assad’s regime is backed with the support of Russia, Iran, the Lebanese militia group Hezbollah and members of the Muslim Shiite community. On the other side the rebels are split into various factions, including al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), Israel, the U.S., and a large population of Sunni Muslims. Geopolitically, Syria is a strategic region because of its geographical location in the Middle East; as a result, Syria has morphed into a proxy-war between both regional and foreign powers who hope to help influence and shape the outcome of the conflict.

Russia has pledged military support for Assad’s regime, which includes providing S-300 air defense missiles and MiG fighters jets. The Kremlin also sent a Russian aircraft carrier, the “Admiral Kuznetsov,” to the Mediterranean to protect the Syrian port of Tartus, a key coastal city for getting supplies and resources to Damascus. These actions show Russia is serious about protecting its interests in the region and is willing to support Assad’s regime, despite Israeli and U.S. criticism. Russia has also stated that it will not tolerate any further military actions taken by Israel against Syria, referring to the Israeli airstrike launched in early May against a weapons depot just outside of Damascus.

Israeli representatives claimed the attack was to ensure Hezbollah was denied a shipment of chemical weapons and other armaments. An Israeli spokesperson commented on the airstrike, “What we can say is that Israel is determined to prevent the transfer of chemical weapons or other game-changing weaponry by the Syrian regime to terrorists, [e]specially to Hezbollah in Lebanon.” Nonetheless, the attack angered Assad and Hezbollah who claim they will seek revenge against Israel.

Although the airstrike garnered international criticism, Israel has a history of acting on its own, including an incident in 1981, known as Operation Opera, in which the Israel air force destroyed a nuclear reactor just outside of Baghdad, Iraq. Israel’s engagements are part of a greater effort to diminish the flow of arms to Hezbollah and to contain its regional rival, Iran, which, in addition to supplying weapons to Hezbollah, has sent members of the Revolutionary Guards to fight alongside Assad’s forces.

One of the primary reasons for Iran’s involvement in Syria, other than supplying arms to Hezbollah, is due to Saudi Arabia, a chief regional rival. Saudi Arabia, a dominant Sunni nation, has declared its open support for the rebels and Sunni militias. Consequently, this has escalated conflict between the Sunni and Shiite Muslims in the region. The fighting between the two sects has grown particularly dire on Iraq’s western border where refugees clash in attempts to flee the fighting in Syria.

The struggle in Syria has become a hot-bed for extremist guerrillas; most recently Muslim fanatics from the Balkans, associated with the Salafist movement, have been recruited to help fight Assad and the Shiite Hezbollah forces. This, along with the desire to see Assade cede power, has prompted many U.S. and European officials to advocate for intervention and support on behalf of certain rebel groups.

Prior to the White House announcement, the U.S. and other European allies were hesitant on providing military aid to the rebels. Allegations that the insurgents used sarin gas against Assad’s forces, and the fragmentation of these groups, made it difficult for Western powers to justify arming the rebels. But recently, Assad’s armies have won some significant battles like the victory at Qusair, which is part of a major strategic supply route near the Syrian-Lebanon border.  Rebel defeats like these prompted Secretary of State John Kerry and Senator John McCain to push for U.S. intervention in Syria, while others have remained skeptical about U.S. involvement.

In an effort to stop the Syrian conflict from spilling over Syrian borders, the U.S. military sent a Patriot Missile Battery, some F-16’s and approximately 5,000 troops to neighboring Jordan. Also, last month Britain and France urged members of the European Union (EU) to let an arms embargo expire, which prohibited European states from providing weapons or military supplies to the Syrian rebels. This has allowed a serious discussion to take place on whether or not members of the EU should arm and support rebel militias.

Mr. Rhodes claimed the U.S. will not implement a no-fly zone or provide U.S. ground troops, but they will offer both light and heavy weapons as well as ammunition to certain rebel blocs.  With the U.S. now becoming directly involved, there is a promising chance that the proxy-war between foreign powers will intensify. In essence, the conflict in Syria has become more than a struggle between Assad and the Syrian people who oppose him.

Because of tensions over Iran’s nuclear program, uprisings in Turkey, rising violence in Iraq, and skirmish’s along the Israeli, Lebanon and Syrian borders, the conflict in Syria has become a focal point in the Middle East. And although the primary focus for the U.S. and its allies is the removal of Assad from power, the U.S. will have to be diligent in its implementation of military resources to rebel groups. Groups like AQI and other Islamic extremist rebels have pledged their allegiance to al-Qaeda, and the last thing the U.S. wants is its own weapons ending up in the possession of its enemies.

Nonetheless, Syria remains a high priority for foreign powers and regional factions due to its geographical location and strategic position in the Middle East. Ultimately, the major powers in the international community cannot afford to ignore the on-going strife, for the fate of the Syrian civil war will play a major role in the escalation – or resolution – of the numerous tensions and conflicts plaguing the Middle East.

Tyler Hooper is a freelance writer and journalist from Ottawa, Ontario. He has a Master’s degree in history from the University of Waterloo, in which his studies primarily evolved around Western and South Asian diplomatic relations during the Cold War. Tyler writes on a variety of subjects including politics and technology, but his passion lies in U.S. foreign policy, particularly U.S. policy in Afghanistan and the Middle East. He has a blog and website at http://tyhooperw.wordpress.com/ where you can check out the rest of his work. You can also follow him on Twitter @thooper8.