Four scenarios and the path to true peace

NOTE: Events in the ongoing Syrian conflict are changing by the hour. The following comprises what we know as of this writing, but the larger scenarios discussed are relevant even as further developments unfold.

Over the weekend, Syrian rebel forces seized control of the capital of Damascus, forcing the long-time dictator, President Bashar al-Assad, into exile in Russia. You are probably more or less interested in a country on the other side of the world depending on the degree to which you consider it more or less relevant to your personal world.

In one scenario, this news is good news for Americans.

In three others, it could lead to global war.

A timeline of the conflict

A civil war against Assad’s brutal regime has been ongoing in Syria since 2011. Hundreds of thousands of people have been killed; half the population has been displaced.

By way of geography: Syria is bordered on the north by Turkey, on the east and southeast by Iraq, on the west by the Mediterranean Sea, on the southwest by Lebanon and Israel, and on the south by Jordan.

Consider a brief timeline of the Syrian conflict:

• In 2013, Lebanon’s Hezbollah, an Iranian proxy, came to Assad’s support, halting rebel momentum against the regime.
• In 2014, US forces intervened in the civil war to fight ISIS forces in the country. The US continues to support Kurdish forces opposed to the Islamic State and to Assad. There are approximately nine hundred American soldiers in Syria today.
• In 2015, Russia joined the war on Assad’s side with air strikes that turned the conflict against the rebels for years to come.
• In 2016, Turkey launched an incursion against Kurdish advances on the border.
• In 2017, Israel acknowledged air strikes against Hezbollah in Syria, seeking to degrade the growing strength of Iran and its allies in the area.
• In 2020, Russia backed a government offensive that ended with a ceasefire with Turkey. Assad held most territory and all main cities; rebels held the northwest; a Turkey-backed force held a border strip; Kurdish forces controlled the northeast.
• In 2023, Hamas attacked Israel, triggering fighting between Israel and Hezbollah that ultimately reduced the group’s presence in Syria and fatally undermined Assad.

On November 29, rebel forces launched a new assault on Aleppo, Syria’s second-largest city. Eight days later, the rebels took most major cities and entered Damascus, driving Assad from power.

Abu Mohammed al-Golani, a former al Qaeda chief, led Hayat Tahrir al-Sham in this successful offensive. Though it cut ties with al Qaeda in 2016, the group has been designated a terrorist organization by the US.

Are we on “the cusp of a world war”?

Now, why is this conflict relevant to the US? To answer this, we need to understand the larger geopolitical motives at work in Syria.

Iran has been supporting the Assad regime for many years, engaging their proxy Hezbollah and other Shiite militias in its defense and utilizing its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to train Syrian forces. This was part of Iran’s “axis of resistance” against Israel, a nation its leaders have sworn to defeat and even annihilate to hasten the return of the Mahdi, their Islamic messiah.

Russia has supported the Syrian regime in part to project geopolitical power and status, in part to keep Muslim extremists in check in the North Caucasus, and in part to protect its naval facility at the Mediterranean port of Tartus and its sizable airbase in northwest Syria. The naval facility has been used to support its invasion of Ukraine; the airbase is used to fly its military contractors in and out of Africa.

Meanwhile, China is Iran’s largest trade partner and the largest market for its oil exports. China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran are all part of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, a NATO-like alliance. In a variety of ways, they have been building an “Axis of Upheaval” to coordinate their widening conflict with the US and its allies in the West.

In light of these developments, Retired Lieutenant General H. R. McMaster, who served as Donald Trump’s second national security adviser from 2017–2018, thinks we’re already on “the cusp of a world war.” Philip Zelikow, who served as executive director of the 9/11 Commission and counselor to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice from 2005 to 2007, agrees: “I think there is a serious possibility of what I call worldwide warfare.” And this was before the fall of the Assad regime.

Three scenarios

I have taught on Islam with four seminaries, traveled widely in the Middle East for many years, and written several books and numerous articles on the region. However, I would be the first to admit that I cannot predict with certainty the future of this crucial and vitriolic “hinge of history.”

But I do think we can summarize possible outcomes of the current conflict in four scenarios.

In what I will call Scenario A:

1. Israel determines that Iran is responding to the fall of Assad by accelerating its quest for nuclear weapons and launches a preemptive strike.
2. Russia, China, and North Korea then defend Iran by striking back at Israel.
3. The US comes to Israel’s defense.
4. American forces are then attacked, and NATO fulfills its treaty obligations by joining the war on our side.

This is clearly a pathway to a world war, one that could come quickly.

In Scenario B, the rebels now controlling Syria comprise an existential threat against Israel, drawing the US and the West into the conflict.

After rebels took control of Syria, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called the collapse of the Assad regime a “historic day in the Middle East,” one that “offers great opportunity but is also fraught with significant dangers.” Such “dangers” exist because the rebels, with their blend of nationalism and Islamism echoing the ideology of the Taliban and Hamas, are already regarded by Israel as a dangerous threat.

On Sunday, Israeli forces took control of a buffer zone on the Syrian border, which Netanyahu called a “temporary defensive position until a suitable arrangement is found.” Earlier today, Israel confirmed that it carried out air strikes on Syria targeting suspected chemical weapons and missile sites to keep these weapons from falling “into the hands of extremists.”

Now imagine that the Syrian rebels determine that armed aggression against Israel is in their best interest.

• Would this bring the support of Iran and Hezbollah to their cause?
• Would this then cause Israel to accelerate military actions in Syria and Lebanon?
• Would this bring Russia and China to Iran’s defense, triggering Scenario A above?

In Scenario C, the rebels controlling Syria align with terrorist groups in the area.

US forces conducted dozens of airstrikes Sunday on more than seventy-five sites in central Syria, including known “ISIS leaders, operatives, and camps.” The barrage is intended to keep such terrorists from gaining power in the country.

As mentioned earlier, the group now controlling Syria began as an al Qaeda offshoot. While it claims to seek a more moderate future, such statements can be deceptive, as Dr. Ryan Denison warns in his recent article on the Syrian conflict. The Taliban, for example, is continuing to enforce a horrific form of extremism in Afghanistan, contradicting earlier claims to the contrary.

If the fall of the Assad regime leads to renewed terrorist activity in Syria, would this lead to Scenario B and even Scenario A?

A “new Middle East”?

In Scenario D, none of this comes to pass.

• The rebels seek to govern Syria in a responsible manner and leave Israel in peace.
• Iran sees the folly of building a nuclear threat against Israel.
• Russia, already embroiled in its invasion of Ukraine, decides to stay out of the conflict.
• Israel is able to conclude its conflict with Hamas, rescuing the hostages and moving into a stable relationship with its Palestinian neighbors.
• Saudi Arabia then joins the Abraham Accords, helping to rebuild Gaza and create a “new Middle East.”

We should most certainly pray for this outcome, but we should not pin our hopes for lasting peace on human efforts. There will be “wars and rumors of wars” until our Lord returns (Matthew 24:6).

Billy Graham was right:

In the same proportion that the world has trusted Christ, it has peace. There can be no lasting peace until Christ has come to the hearts of all people and brought them his peace.

There is no discord in Heaven, there is no strife in Heaven, for Christ reigns supreme there. Similarly, in the heart where Christ abides and reigns, his words become a reality: “Peace I leave with you” (John 14:27). The truth of these words has been proven in human experience over and over again.

Accordingly, let us “pray for the peace of Jerusalem” (Psalm 122:6) and the world, then join the angels in proclaiming that the Christ of Christmas alone can bring true and lasting peace on earth (Luke 2:14). And let’s model this peace by making the Prince of Peace our Lord and king (Isaiah 9:6).

As the prophet foretold, “Of the increase of his government and peace there will be no end” (v. 7).

May it be so for you and me today, to the glory of God.

 

Denison Forum