Friday, February 24, 2012

Unintended Consequences: The Problem with Syria

From Chuck Colson

What should our leaders think about as they consider aiding the Syrian rebels?

If the past decade taught Americans anything, it is that there is no getting around the law of unintended consequences, especially in foreign policy.

No matter how good our intentions might be or how carefully we plan, once we “cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war” we no longer control events, they control us.

As I said, this should be obvious by now. But apparently it isn’t…


And let’s not kid ourselves: civil war is the most likely result of Western intervention. Even if Assad could be persuaded to quit Syria, the rest of Syria’s 3.5 million Alawites have nowhere to go. They would be facing the prospect of reprisals. Since they control the Army and security apparatus, they would of course fight.

Caught in the middle of all this destruction, loss, and instability would be Syria’s Christian minority, which constitutes about ten percent of the population. Like their Iraqi brethren, their fate doesn’t figure prominently in the thinking of those urging intervention.

It figures in mine, and it should figure in yours. While I understand the sentiment that led to the so-called “duty to protect,” I also understand the history behind the phrase “unintended consequences.”

The question is: do our leaders?

Read it all here …