While the Christian world celebrates the birth of a baby in a stable in Bethlehem two thousand years ago, for the families herded into grim makeshift refugee camps along the Syrian-Turkish border, such accommodation currently represents unattainable luxury.
At least half a million Syrians have now registered with the UN after fleeing the civil war that has engulfed their country and their numbers are growing by around 3,000 every day. But while they are no longer threatened by the bombs and bullets of President Bashar al-Assad's army, many now fear they could freeze to death. Dressed in thin clothes, they shiver in damp flimsy tents as temperatures drops. With no electricity or running water and little food, this is a humanitarian disaster in the making.
Without an international invasion, for which there is little appetite, little can be done for the 2.5m Syrians estimated to be displaced within their own country. As the Syrian Arab Red Crescent, the country's main aid provider, is controlled by the Syrian government, those identified with the rebels are likely to be in desperate need. However, more could and should be done for those seeking sanctuary in Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey. The numbers pouring out of Syria suggest that nobody believes this war will end any time soon. Jordan, an already desperately poor country, is struggling to cope. While the US has pledged $100m, the response of the international community has been too slow.
Initially the response of Turkey, which is far wealthier, was more organised but it is now being overwhelmed by the daily influx. Both countries fear the crisis will bring internal instability. The international community may be unable to staunch Assad's bloodletting and unwilling to step in or arm the rebels, given the fear of what could replace his regime, but it could be doing much more to support neighbouring countries that are struggling to cope with the human fallout.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article