To my previous posts Violence in Syria overtakes UN undemocratic policies and Revived Russia-China friendship analysis, I would like to add the analysis by Gideon Rachmann Western ambivalence on Syria. In his post, the foreign affairs columnist for the Financial Times, lists:
- No appetite for military intervention, but a possible necessity for it
- A wariness of regional warfare, as Syria risks becoming a battleground between Sunni and Shia in the Middle East
as the main independent variables through which analysts must look at the current situation of instability.
The first variable was identified, since May 2011, in an op-ed by Moses Naim as a main cause for the ambivalence of intervietnion policies bewteen Lybia and Syria.
The second now becomes a real concern (or fear) about the opening of a new front for protracted regional instability.