AMIDST growing fears that Syria is on the point of imploding into civil war, President Bashar al-Assad has finally yielded to pressure from the Arab League to allow observers to enter the country in a last-ditch attempt to halt eight months of violence which has cost the lives of some 3500 civilians.

The number of observers has been reduced from a requested 500 to an agreed 40 but Arab diplomats say that following Syria’s earlier suspension from the 22-member Arab League the agreement is a significant concession. However, it remains to be seen if the deal will be fully implemented.

At the same time on Friday, anti-government demonstrations continued across the country in the towns of Homs, Palmyra, and Tayyibat al-Iman on a day which crowds dubbed “the Friday of departing ambassadors” – a reference to the call by anti-government activists for foreign countries to withdraw their ambassadors in protest at the Assad regime.

The moves came against a background of international concern that the Syrian crisis is spinning out of control. On Friday, as the killing continued, Ahmet Davutoglu, foreign minister of neighbouring Turkey, warned that the Arab world had to take immediate steps to prevent a greater tragedy unfolding. He spoke at the end of a week which had seen defectors from the Syrian army successfully carry out an attack on an air force intelligence installation in Damascus, which gave notice that there is now a real split in Syria’s armed forces.

“It is now the right time to stop this massacre, and therefore the Arab initiative is important,” said Davutoglu. “If it is not successful of course there is always a risk of civil war or high-level tension in Syria.”

France, too, has added its voice to the condemnation. On Friday, foreign minister Alain Juppe insisted that “the situation is no longer sustainable” and that it was time for the United Nations to impose stricter sanctions on the regime unless Assad introduces reforms. Unfortunately that seems unlikely as Russia, one of the permanent members of the Security Council, has indicated that it will veto any French proposal.

From being a brutal insurgency which was countered by the armed might of forces loyal to Assad the violence is slowly and inexorably drifting into a Libya-style armed conflict as the oppressed population backed by renegade soldiers take to arms.

Despite Syria’s decision to comply with the Arab League peace plan. the stakes remain high.

Throughout the violence, Assad has insisted that he was facing opposition from activists who were intent on destroying the country’s political fabric and were being supported by unnamed groups from neighbouring countries. This was a tactic used by Muammar Gaddafi who blamed the recent violence in Libya on al-Qaeda terrorists but this is certainly not the case in Syria where most of the activists on the streets have been members of the majority Sunni sect.

Instead, the violence has been inspired by demands for political and economic reforms and for a more equable system of voting – Assad and his associates are members of the minority Alawite faction which controls most senior positions in the administration and the armed forces. These have been genuine demands from reasonably moderate demonstrators but Assad’s response has been confined to ordering his forces to use extreme violence against unarmed civilians and he has ignored several opportunities to make concessions which might have pacified the crowds. Assad’s current policy appears to rest on an appeal to Syrians to put their trust in him and to resist demands for changes which could put the country in jeopardy.

So far it has worked – despite the violence, support for the status quo is widespread – but all that could change if the fighting continues. When the crackdown was introduced earlier this year, most of the army units involved in the operations were under the command of officers loyal to Assad and his brother Maher al-Assad, who commands the republican Guard and elite 4th Armoured Division.

However, there is now evidence that soldiers from other units, mainly Sunni conscripts, have deserted and fled over the border into Turkey to form the renegade Free Syrian Army (FSA) which has emerged as a potent fighting force, albeit equipped with only a limited number of modern weapons.

The FSA is under the command of Colonel Riyad al-Assad (no relation of the president’s family) who has announced his goal as “securing the dignity and freedom of the Syrian people, overthrowing the regime and protecting the revolution”.

The colonel claims to have 15,000 fighters under his command, a small figure compared to the regular army’s 200,000 soldiers, but they bring a huge commitment to the cause. One of his junior officers told a French news agency that what the FSA lacked in numbers they made up for in training and patriotism.

“Soldiers defect every day, only yesterday, a dozen joined my brigade in Homs,” he said.

If the FSA is to have any chance, though, they need more weapons. At present they are mainly equipped with light weapons such as AK-47 assault rifles and obsolescent rocket-propelled grenades. In that role they are susceptible to attack by armoured vehicles – Assad has not balked at using tanks against civilians – and there are fears that war planes could also be used against the FSA. If that happens, world powers may find it difficult not to intervene as they did recently in Libya.

In the coming days, unless the Arab League plan succeeds, there will be other calls for the international community to intervene. But already Western commanders are urging caution because the situation in Syria is very different from Libya. If civil war does break out, it will be difficult to contain the conflict within Syria’s borders.

Other countries in the region have vested interests in the outcome, notably Iran, President Assad’s strongest supporter. Iran’s foreign minister Ali Akbar Salehi has already denounced the Arab League’s intervention as a hasty move that will add to “Islamophobia” in the west. Tellingly he added that it had been done “to serve the interests of an illegitimate regime,” a clear reference to Israel.

While this kind of attack is standard Iranian diplomatic rhetoric there is a subtext which adds to the sense of unease across the Middle East. On Friday the US, UK, France and Germany delivered a strongly worded statement to the International Atomic Energy Agency accusing Iran of deceiving the world and declaring they could no longer dismiss evidence that the country is still working secretly on the development of nuclear weapons.

Although the document did not mention the use of any military action, senior US commanders admit it could be an option unless Iran provides solid guarantees that is not interested in becoming a nuclear power. The US-backed move has also reignited rumours that Israel is planning a pre-emptive strike against Iranian nuclear facilities, perhaps next year when the US withdraws from Iraq. The rumours led to a robust response from Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei who warned: “Anybody who takes up the idea of an attack on Iran should get ready to receive a strong slap and an iron fist.”

So far, Iran has limited its interference in Syria to sending security advisers to Damascus and to providing additional military resources in the field. FSA commanders have already reported seeing Iranian special forces in action and are aware that some of the Syrian counter-insurgency tactics come straight from the field manuals of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. Members of this elite formation have also been involved in Bahrain where the authorities said they had arrested a suspected Iranian terror group that was planning to attack key installations including the King Fahd Causeway.

The incident excited the interest of Saudi Arabia, which also has an interest in what is happening in Syria. Earlier this year King Abdullah made a scathing attack on Syrian tactics and bluntly stated that the “killing machine and bloodshed” had to be stopped. His words went unheeded but Saudi remains a key player. Not only is it a supporter of the Syrian Sunnis but it enjoys the support of US President Barack Obama, who regards the Saudi leader as a possible mediator. That would have been true but for the fact that the Saudis are suspected of using interference in Syria as a means of hitting back at Iran.

That leaves Turkey to the north as a possible go-between.

Its prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been a constant critic of what is happening in Syria, and along with France, Turkey has kept up demands for action.

“No doubt, the problems both in Syria and in the Middle East are global problems,” he said. “We have to see the tragedy and urgently take measures to stop the bloodshed for the safety of energy supplies as much as global peace and calm.”

Erdogan claims time is running out for fine words. While Syria’s administration was agreeing to the Arab League’s plan, the killing went on, with a reported 25 civilians gunned down on Friday and at least three more yesterday.

It is not yet civil war, but unless the state-sponsored violence is checked, it cannot be far away.