Featuring in the news prominently over recent months has been the influence and progress of the IS (Islamic State): a militant Islamist movement which intends to unite Sunni Muslim countries under a single government. So far, it has extended its control over parts of Iraq- as well as Syria.
From beheading an American journalist, to punishing Iraq's Christian minority, IS does indeed seem to be a menacing force in the Middle East today. However, in this part of the world it is difficult to know who are the forces for right and wrong- with the conflict with IS highlighting this. Not so long ago, the Assad government of Syria and the Ayatollah's regime in Iran were considered some of the Western World's greatest opponents; now, they are implied to be the lesser evil in the face of IS, and potential partners in the fight against IS.
Taking sides in a conflict where both sides are guilty of crimes against humanity does not seem a wise (or moral) move by governments in Europe and the USA. It is difficult to know who really offers the greatest opportunities for the Middle East and, although humanitarian intervention (with UN support) is justifiable in certain circumstances, prolonged and direct involvement seems inadvisable as it is certainly not for the direct benefit of the peoples of the Western World- and may also lead to the empowerment of a new regime which is just as bad, if not worse, than the one it replaces. In addition, hostile rhetoric from Western leaders concerning IS seems to just antagonise them and make them more likely to threaten the West, not alleviate it. Therefore, aside from humanitarian assistance, it would seem best to avoid intervention in such a messy conflict.
No comments:
Post a Comment