Syria. A land torn by war and violence. Bashar Al-Assad, the authoritarian president of Syria since 2000, still leads the nation. The FSA (Free Syrian Army) and other insurgencies such as ISIS and the Al-Nusra front oppose his regime. The conflict began in March of 2011 when protests against Assad's rule were suppressed. The rebels and "anti-assadists", so to speak, originally seized parts of southern Syria and areas around the city of Aleppo. The conflict has escalated tremendously and is the fuel for the refugee crisis. The Syrian government and the opposition to it have now been at war for 6 years. The rebels and groups against the current Syrian regime are sketchy, so to speak, and their succession in the war is a blow against peace and stability. What Syria needs right now is Assad and this is his case.
First and foremost, radical jihadist groups such as ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) and Al-Nusra are active and alive in Syria. Were they to succeed we would likely see more massacres, political instability, radical Islam and terror attacks around the world as ISIS has already claimed responsibility for many terror attacks around the globe. Even the possibly moderate rebels in Syria are reportedly not at war with other "anti-Assad" groups. If any rebel group is to succeed it would likely help ISIS as some of their primary opposition would be removed. Assad and his ally, Russia, attempt to keep Syria safe from jihadists and radicals. Assad's ally, Russia has reportedly killed at the least 28,000 members of ISIS. Assad's own regime has killed around 50,000 ISIS members and foreign rebels. The numbers on these are shaky because it is likely that both sides are lying about casualty numbers in order to appear as if they were winning. Assad is also more secular than usual Middle-eastern rulers and he has defended Syrian Christians. This secularism is good and is a sure sign of Assad's opposition to radical jihadism. Why would any jihadist support Christianity after all? Many Christians in Syria support Assad as he defends them, doesn't persecute them and has allowed them to live in peace. When groups like ISIS are pining for control of Syria, it could turn into a more chaotic form of Iran where Christianity is treated cruelly -Recently a man in Iran was arrested for converting to Christianity. ISIS has already made Christianity punishable by death in the city of Mosul. FSA fighters have attacked the Christian village al-Duvair and killed the women and children until the Syrian army intervened. Assad protects the Christians and other minorities of Syria and he opposes religion in issues of the state (Rafizadeh). Assad's rule allows Christians to attend church masses and celebrate Christian holidays freely (Rafizadeh). An end of Assad would likely mean the death of many Syrian christians if not the end of it entirely.
Furthermore, in the past we have seen regime change have catastrophic results time after time. I am not claiming that regime change has never succeeded, but that even if it has some of the intended consequences we often get more than intended for. Libya, once the richest country of Africa, now a ruined country. They once had the highest life expectancy rate and highest GDP per capita of all of Africa. After the 2011 intervention, Libya is now a poorer country and its oil production is down by three quarters. Any infrastructure projects were also halted. The country once had a central government ran by Qaddafi. Now it has 2 government forces competing for control of Libya. A man named Hassan, who was previously a rebel in Libya, said "it is not promising, and many of us [former rebels] regret what happened because we never expected it to be this bad." He also said "that "life under Gadhafi was much better than it is now."
When Russia invaded Afghanistan the U.S and its anti-Soviet agenda had decided to fund Pakistanis in their war against Russia. The U.S sold them F-16s and spent around $20 billion to arm and train the fighters. After Soviet withdrawal the U.S immediately cut off funding. The remaining groups in Afghanistan had then fought for control of Kabul and for power. During this the Taliban arose.
Later in 2001, the Taliban implemented an opium cultivation ban. That same year the U.S sent Afghanistan a grant of $43 million because they appreciated the anti-drug sentiment (Carpenter) . It turned out that the Taliban had banned opium cultivation so that the opium that they already had would be more expensive. Even more opium came into the country from reports of authorities in Tajikistan. The U.S was sending money to a state that was peddling drugs. The U.S had helped an organization that had none of the U.S interests in mind. According to former British foreign secretary, Robin Cook, Al Qaeda was extremists funded and trained by Saudis and the CIA in order to defeat Russians in Afghanistan. Al Qaeda was later responsible for 9/11 attacks. The U.S has supported rebels and resistances many times only to backfire or with unintended consequences. Support for the FSA could easily have similar results. The FSA has already targeted infrastructure in Syria and they took down one of the main power plants in Damascus. The FSA reportedly attacked al-Duvair, a Christian dominated village, and massacred women and children. The Syrian Army later intervened for the Christians. There are two options that we may face if we seek regime change, either terrorists will gain control of Syria and one radical group will control it or terrorist groups will all "get a turn" at controlling Syria where the terrorist group is then replaced (by force) by another terrorist group and so on. Regime change and the funding of rebel groups is always dirty business and can make situations worse than they previously were.
