Professor: There are 3 reasons to not get involved in Syria

To view this site, you need to have Flash Player 9.0.115 or later installed. Click here to get the latest Flash player.

August 27, 2013, 7:49 am
Print Article

(NECN) - "What we saw in Syria last week should shock the conscience of the world. It defies any code of morality. Let me be clear, the indiscriminate slaughter of civilians, the killing of women and children and innocent bystanders by chemical weapons is a moral obscenity.”
Passionate words from Secretary of State John Kerry suggested imminent action in response to the deaths of Syrian citizens after a chemical weapons attack.

Just Tuesday morning, U.N. investigators were delayed from returning to the alleged attack site by fighting rebels.

This comes as the Syrian government said it will defend itself using all available means in case of a U.S. strike. In Washington, President Obama is still considering response options.

Here with insight is Peter Krause, research fellow and assistant professor at Boston College.

Krause says there are three reasons we might not want to get involved in Syria.

He says the first reason is the fact that we’re still not yet certain what happened here, whether this was an accident or a calculated attack by the Assad regime.

Secondly, Krause says, limited intervention is rarely successful, and it often prolongs conflict, it doesn’t end it.

Lastly, he says, American people don’t support intervention. One of the reasons is the fact that a lot of countries are involved here. The Iranians, Russians, Turks, the Saudis all want a stake in what happens in the new Syria here. All can prevent victory, Krause says, even if they can’t themselves win the fight.

Turkey, France and Britain have said something needs to be done. Russia has said do not do this, there could be violent repercussions. Iran is also saying don’t do this.

Krause says you’ll probably see some kind of international coalition led by the US, the British, the French, perhaps the Turks, getting involved here, condemning the Assad regime and having some type of limited strikes on the Syrian government.

He thinks they are considering some type of limited military strikes against political and military targets of the Syrian regime, including some chemical weapons sites. Krause says the problem is you can’t necessarily know where all the chemical weapons are and knock them all out, so the key here is to have a clear idea of the targets, clear idea of what you’re trying to achieve and also think about the next step because the Syrian regime isn’t just going to take these strikes lying down and not respond in any way.

Krause thinks there’s an incredibly, incredibly small chance of boots on the ground in Syria.

Watch the attached video for more.

Tags: Boston College, US, Syria, Peter Krause, chemical weapons, military response, limited intervention
Check out these events for something fun this weekend
Karin O'Keefe discusses some deals and steals
Mara Dolan discusses Tuesday night's 'State of the Commonwealth' address to be delivered by Deval Patrick
Alex Power-Hays discusses making the video; challenge for kids to make their own video
Doctor John Mafi discusses the role of exercise in helping your aches
Student Reporter Peter Costanza finds out what people think of the online currency
This small gadget can be used to make quick, small sushi rolls
Student Reporter Zeban Jaggi finds out how people cope on the holiday