U.S.: No Good Options in a Syrian Intervention

Many within the United States continue to debate whether Washington can afford to refrain from intervening in Syria. U.S. Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, a professed interventionist, recently warned that the regime in neighboring Jordan could collapse if the Syria conflict continued unabated and urged U.S. President Barack Obama to work to contain the crisis. Certainly Jordan has become a sanctuary for Syrian refugees, but it is not the only country that will suffer — or has already suffered, for that matter — from the effects of spillover violence. Turkey, Iraq, Lebanon, and Israel all run that risk.

The prospect of spillover violence notwithstanding, several other factors restrain U.S. intervention, including the cost of war and a lack of popular support. There is also the distinct possibility that once the al Assad regime falls, Syria could become a haven for transnational terrorists. Add to this the fact that intervention could go a long way in realizing a key American objective: undermining Iranian regional influence. Thus, Washington faces a dilemma: It cannot afford to participate in what may end up being an inevitable intervention.