LEAVE SYRIA TO ITS OWN DEVICES

This morning's news has revealed more stories of atrocities being carried out by the government in Syria.

This country is currently in a state of civil war, akin to what afflicted England in the 1600s, France and America in the 1700s and many others since, and yet we continue to wring our hands in horror and whine on with platitudes such as 'something must be done'. In fact, nothing, or very little, either must be done or should be done.

Cut the country off, certainly; impose sanctions and exclude them from international bodies, but let them get on with it. Western interference in Afghanistan has achieved nothing of lasting merit and Iraq will eventually fall apart again. Egypt is still a military dictatorship and it's a racing certainty that Libya will soon return to a state of chaos and / or dicatorship too.

What has happened in these assorted countries, and is still happening in most of them, is a process that much of the western world went through in the past, in some cases in the distant past. It is a process that is inevitable and necessary as nations are built in a way that will last, rather than in a way that satisfies the external politics of today. Much of North Africa and the Middle East was divided up along simple lines drawn in the sand by victorious generals and these divisions took no account of the wishes, needs or tribal loyalties of the local inhabitants. The ongoing problems in recent years owe much to these arbitrary decisions and the only way to resolve them is to let the local people work out their own solutions.

If the United Nations had any real muscle it could take a lead, but it's no more than a talking shop for a bunch of grotesquely overpaid and overvalued politcians and civil servants who all have more more regard for their own positions than for anything else. When did we last hear anyhing of note from the Secretary General ? Indeed, can anyone remember his name or where he's from ? In the absence of strong and united central authority, the UN is an expensive waste of space.

A few years ago, the US would quite possibly have sent troops in to Syria by now but that is no longer a realistic option, given the twin disasters of Iraq and Afghanistan. They also have to be far too concerned about the rapidly escalating trouble between Iran and Israel to have much time left to worry about Syria. China won't do anything and Russia can't, Britain and France won't act without UN backing, leaving the Syrians, perhaps with a little help from their Arab neighbours, to sort things out for themselves.

It will be very unpleasant and very bloody, but so are all civil wars. Assad may well end up dead, but so did Charles I, Louis XVI, Nicholas II, Gaddafi and many more. If the west interferes, there may be a less bloody and quicker resolution, but then the locals will be at it again in a few years. If we let them sort it out for themselves, it may take longer and be much nastier, but it will also produce a much longer lasting solution.