Analysis & Opinions - Philadelphia Inquirer

Between a Rock, a Hard Place, and a Humanitarian Crisis

| March 9, 2014

Three years on, Washington and the international community are still weighing how best to respond to the Syrian crisis. Indeed, the National Security Council met again recently to review the now-familiar list of options — from pushing for further peace talks to arming the opposition and more. According to the latest news reports, the Obama administration even dusted off old, unused plans to reconsider a cyberattack against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's forces. Still, we're doing a lot of nothing. Because sometimes even the best options are really quite bad.

For the last two months, Washington and key partner nations have focused on using diplomacy and negotiations to solve the crisis. The peace talks in Geneva became the centerpiece of international efforts in the region — and, for a brief time, gave millions of Syrians anemic hope for an end to the violence. But Geneva went so poorly that all parties left without even agreeing to hold more talks. As one Syrian teacher commented as we watched the talks on TV from a refugee camp in Jordan, it's "just giv[ing] more time to Bashar to kill."

Debate also has focused on how the United States can support the opposition forces more actively, with aid, weapons, and other forms of direct support. But that's become even more difficult in the last few weeks as the Supreme Military Council — a weak coalition of moderate, Western-backed opposition groups — has fallen into further disarray. In fact, after an embarrassing incident late last year in which Islamic extremists seized the group's weapons cache, U.S. officials temporarily suspended nonlethal aid to the rebels. This moderate armed opposition is more divided than ever despite recently appointing a new leader. A Syrian refugee in Amman told me last month, "I don't think anyone can understand what is going on in Syria."

The most recent distraction surrounds the revelation of a possible cyberattack targeting Assad's forces. While it might be the most creative option on the table, it's unclear what the effects would be — including whether such a limited attack would have any significant effect on the war, how such action would be perceived around the world, and how it might change the use of cyberwarfare in the future. Even Syrians wouldn't likely think much of a U.S. cyberattack after years of American nonintervention, as it would not likely change the trajectory of the conflict or improve humanitarian relief efforts. Much like the other available options, this approach is deeply flawed and unlikely to succeed.

At this point, the only thing that's clear is that there won't be peace anytime soon. Syria's civil war began three years ago next month; the violence won't end for many more years. That means the Syrian refugees are facing protracted displacement before they can return home to rebuild a country that had been considered one of the most culturally sophisticated, well-educated, and vibrant in the region, and that is now in shambles.

All this leaves one good option: While politicians at home and overseas focus on how to help end the war through anything short of direct intervention, it's time for the international community — both public and private sectors — to focus on long-term strategies to support the growing Syrian refugee population.

There has been tremendous work on this front already in the form of direct and in-kind assistance to the millions of refugees now residing in and out of camps in Jordan, Turkey, Lebanon, and Iraq. But given the size and intransigence of the refugee crisis, it requires long-term planning that supports refugees psychologically and provides them with the education and skills they will need to reconstruct Syria. It also means shifting the focus of the regional response from humanitarian aid to development on a massive scale, with an eye toward helping this community return home as soon as the crisis ends.

As one refugee said while we discussed the war, politics, and life in Za'atari refugee camp, "What's worse [than the war] is the silence exhibited by the world." Maybe it's finally time to select a bad option. In the meantime, we should support the only good option available. Millions of Syrians are counting on it.

For more information on this publication: Belfer Communications Office
For Academic Citation: Porges, Marisa.“Between a Rock, a Hard Place, and a Humanitarian Crisis.” Philadelphia Inquirer, March 9, 2014.