On Syria... and other Middle-Eastern Musings..

Fox has a story regarding protesters outside the American embassy at Damascus; supposedly angry regarding the latest flak against the Syrian leadership for their alleged part in the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.

The demonstration came a day after the U.N. Security Council (search) unanimously passed a strongly worded resolution demanding that Syria fully cooperate with U.N. investigators looking into the slaying of Rafik Hariri (search).

"We are not criminals. We are not terrorists. We just need peace," one protester declared on the podium in al-Rawda square as patriotic songs blared from a loudspeaker.

That must explain why, the last time I checked, Syria remains on this list. Not that I believe that every citizen in Syria is a terrorist, but what I will point out is that their government has not so much as lifted a finger to quell terrorism emanating from their country and even uses terrorism as means of enacting foreign policy. This quote is especially telling:

An estimated 300 people took part in Tuesday's protest. It was organized by a private group called the Syrian Committee for Public Relations, but spontaneous demonstrations are extremely rare in Syria without state authorization.

So to say that this was a spontaneous citizen-led protest in support of their beloved government may be considered a stretch, to say the least.

The pressure has been brought to bear since the U.N., including the U.S., France and Germany drafted a resolution that would impose economic sanctions should Syrian officials refuse to cooperate with the investigation. Some say that such resolutions would be a step toward avoiding war:

By Carol Giacomo, Diplomatic Correspondent

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - By tightening the diplomatic noose around Syria's leadership, the United States is aiming to ensure a weakened, compliant government in Damascus without the use of military force.

The Bush administration, tempered by the Iraq experience, appears to be approaching the conflict over the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik al-Hariri with more caution. It is striving for a "win-win situation" in which a "weak and frightened Bashar al-Assad (stays in power but) is more cooperative," said Jon Alterman, head of Middle East programs at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

But some experts worry the growing international pressure could cause events in Syria to spin out of control.

Spin out of control? I don't know the standards by which you operate, but I would pretty much call being a state-sponsor of terrorism and plotting/carrying out the assassination of a nation's leader just a bit out of control to begin with. Regardless, there appears to be some mixed optimism:

"What I keep hearing from everyone ... is that the regime is weakening and the fear factor (among Syrians) is diminishing," he said, but he wondered whether opposition to Assad's rule might be "reaching a critical mass?"

Much depends on Mehlis' probe and whether he implicates Assad himself in Hariri's assassination, officials said.

"If the international community believes Assad and his circle are guilty of killing Hariri, it's very difficult to see how they can be left in power," said the congressional aide, who is restricted from speaking on the record.

But it is also tempered with:

...Alterman said it is unclear who might succeed Assad. Neither the military nor pro-democracy activists have the capacity to take over, he said."

History shows us that sanctions appear to have little to no effect on issues middle-eastern. Libya may be considered a rare exception, but Qadaffi no doubt saw the writing on the wall after the invasion of Iraq; and clearly saw it in his own selfish interest to avoid having bunker-busters dropped on his living quarters.

It is certain, however, that sooner or later, the Syrian government will need to be deposed, either through diplomatic or other channels. Since there is no goverment waiting to step in, the process of building a civilized representative republic will be a daunting one.

It may very well indeed be the higher calling of our generation to re-make the entire middle east into something that the rest of the world can live with. This entire process, once attained, will be toward the betterment of the world for generations to come. The Great Challenges of The World Wars, the Civil War, the Revolutionary War, and on and on down the line were placed in the hands of those generations, who courageously embraced those challenges and did not shirk those responsibilities on their progeny.

Today, the timelines have been such that many of our generation, never knowing the fear of danger; never knowing fear of losing our very right to exist as a nation, have been lulled into a false sense of security to the point where many cannot fathom such an eventuality. Many feel that "There will always be a U.S!", and that present and future challenges to our sovereignity posed by tyrants, either within or without borders, are either imagined or blown out of proportion. They also falsely believe that if nothing is done, or if we can only show our enemies enough love and show them that we mean no harm, the threat will disappear. History has shown this never to be the case, and unfortunately history has a damning way of repeating itself.

The long and the short of it remains: The Great Challenge of our generation now lies before us. Question is, do we embrace it, or do we shirk it? The future of many a generation will ride on our decision.