Supporting Bashar al-Assad in Syria: The Realpolitik Dilemma
The situation in Syria is reaching a critical juncture, with the sudden emergence of the Al Qaeda splinter group Hay’at Tahrir al-sham (HTS) posing a significant threat to the region. This development has left Western powers grappling with a complex geopolitical dilemma: should they support the brutal dictatorship of President Bashar al-Assad or the jihadist forces of HTS?
HTS’s Aggressive Move
Last week, HTS launched an attack on Aleppo, Syria’s second city, and swiftly gained control, cutting off the crucial M5 highway between Aleppo and Damascus. The group’s leader, Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, has made bold statements about advancing towards Damascus and even Jerusalem, raising concerns about their extremist ideologies and international terrorist connections. With HTS allegedly funded by Turkey, their aggressive move not only threatens Assad’s regime but also Iran, a key ally in the region.
West’s Moral Dilemma
For Western powers, choosing sides in this conflict based on moral values has become increasingly challenging. The history of Western involvement in the Middle East, from failed attempts to bring Syria under the Western umbrella to misguided interventions in the Arab Spring, highlights the complexities of the region’s political landscape. The rise of HTS presents a stark choice between supporting a brutal regime or extremist jihadists, neither of which align with Western values.
Realpolitik Over Morality
Despite the moral complexities of the situation, the imperative for Western powers is clear: prioritize realpolitik over morality. While the Assads may be brutal rulers, they do not support international terrorism like Al Qaeda, Isis, Hezbollah, and Hamas. The Assads’ opposition to these groups aligns with Western interests, making them a more strategic choice in the broader geopolitical context.
The Geopolitical Reality
In a region where the options are limited to jihadi dictatorship or secular military dictatorship, the West faces a challenging decision. While Syria may not be an ally of Israel, the threat posed by extremist groups like HTS outweighs the concerns about Assad’s regime. The pragmatic approach of realpolitik dictates that Western powers must prioritize their own interests over moral considerations in the complex geopolitics of the Middle East.
As we navigate the intricacies of the Syrian conflict, it becomes evident that the choice is not between good and evil but between what serves our strategic interests. The West must confront the harsh realities of the region and make decisions based on geopolitical considerations rather than moral absolutes. In a world where moral clarity is scarce, realpolitik remains the guiding principle of international relations.