TONY Blair and other advocates of regime change by force in Syria are ignoring the disasters it creates.
Iraq's continuing sectarian civil war includes al Qaeda, which wasn't in Iraq before the invasion.
It has become stronger than ever since the US ended funding for Iraqi awakening militias. Al Qaeda In Iraq helped establish the group's Syrian wing, Al Nusrah.
Since Col Gadaffi's overthrow in Libya, militias have tortured and killed his supporters and even his former opponents, along with thousands of black Libyans.
British and French embassy staff have also been attacked and US embassy staff killed by Islamist groups. Al Qaeda has also been able to use Libya as a base for attacks on French targets in Niger.
Regime change by force in Syria would also strengthen al Qaeda and merely replace Sunnis and Assad opponents being tortured and killed with Alawites, Shia, Christians and Kurds and Assad supporters becoming the victims.
There have already been massacres of Alawites by anti-Assad foreign jihadists in the town of Aqrab and by Islamist rebels of Shia in Hatla.
Tens of thousands of Syrian Christians have fled from Sunni extremist groups.
Lebanon's electoral law, which guarantees Muslims and Christians an equal share of seats in parliament, shows sectarian civil wars can be ended by equal power sharing.
In Syria, power sharing could be between opponents and supporters of Mr Assad, including a referendum on replacing the presidency with a multi-member ruling council, indirectly elected by parliament, to give every faction a share of power.
Rebel groups which signed up to power sharing could become Syrian army units under their existing commanders, with an agreement that within a fixed time half of all professional soldiers and officers would be non-Alawites, along with similar changes in the composition of the police and judiciary.
Any armed group which rejected the agreement or continued hostilities (most likely including Al Qaeda / Nusrah) could be attacked as an enemy by all who had until it was defeated, disarmed and disbanded, or accepted the agreement.
Duncan McFarlane,
Beanshields,
Braidwood,
Carluke.
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