Within the last month the world has been inundated with reports of Russia’s sudden intervention in the Syrian Civil War in order to combat terrorist groups and maintain the government of President Bashar al-Assad. Since the Russo intervention, fears of Russian hegemony in the Middle East have grown in the West; I believe these fears are senseless. America should welcome new intervention as it seems incapable of doing much good by its own methods. America’s historical policy of foreign intervention has largely been one of misguidance, destabilization and failure. Since the conclusion of the Second World War, the U.S. has invaded some 50 countries, disrupting the internal mechanics of nations that posed questionable amounts of threat to our security; for the U.S. to criticize Russia’s recent action, especially considering its success, is laughably hypocritical. America’s cyclical failure in foreign intervention renders me sympathetic to Russian action aimed at reestablishing stability to a country that is in sore need of it, as America seems inherently unable to do so.
If one looks at the situation, it’s not difficult to see that Syria is another example of an American failure in the Middle East as a result of Washington’s support of “moderate” groups within the Free Syrian Army, which have proven more prone to corruption and defection than combat. The administration’s foolish belief that arming competing mobs with weapons will result in a democratic Syria is as negligent as it is maniacal. With ISIS and Al-Qaeda now involved in Syria, the destabilization of the region has only become more substantial. Terrorist organizations have complicated a situation that was already complicated to begin with; as a result, more force is now necessary to overpower them. We must also keep in mind that the numerous rebel groups supported by American tax dollars have been largely ineffectual at halting the progress of these more sinister groups.
So, what can be done to combat this chaotic situation? With its relative and necessary ferocity, the Russian military has made impressive gains in repelling the terrorists at a greater rate than America has. Since the U.S. began its air campaign against ISIS on Aug. 8, 2014, it has delivered an average of 14 airstrikes a day according to the U.S. Department of Defense. By contrast, Russia’s Ministry of Defence has carried out nearly 36 strikes a day, destroying nearly 456 ISIS targets since operations began on Sept. 30, 2015, according to its website; why America isn’t welcoming this reinforcement is nonsensical.
Of course, the purported reason for American hostility towards Russian action comes from Moscow’s support of Assad and abhorrence of the two-faced Free Syrian Army. As unpopular as it may sound, I believe the endorsement of Assad is prudent, as authoritarianism seems to be the more effective vehicle for delivering stability to the Middle Eastern morass than democracy, which has completely failed to function in nearly every Middle Eastern country. If Assad is able to gain control of his country, it is my hope that he will then be compelled by Russia and the international community as a whole to work out his political difficulties with his citizenry.
Substantive change cannot happen when mob rule and terrorists reign supreme.