Oil and political diplomacy explains the caution
India’s equidistant position on the crisis in Syria and concern over a military strike on the country by the US-led West, are understandable. At a time when the country is battling a major rupee crisis which threatens to blow our fuel import bill to an unmanageable level, the last thing it would want is an addition to its woes. A military confrontation between Syria and the West will certainly impact global fuel prices and lead to a further escalation in India's dollar payment on account of crude oil. Interestingly, Damascus has played up this possibility with New Delhi when its Ambassador, Mr Raid Kamel Abbas, hinted at the dangers that lie for this country in a US-led strike and praised India for its stand. Apart from the economic dangers that a military intervention by the West holds, New Delhi is also apprehensive that the offensive could result in even more violence than there has been over the last two years since fighting between the Syrian forces and the rebels began. More than a 1,00,000 lives have been lost and two billion people have been displaced — with many taking refuge in neighbouring countries. While India's concerns are sound, a hands-off approach will not necessarily end the violence in Syria. It is fine to call upon all sides “to abjure violence, so that conditions can be created for an inclusive political dialogue leading to a comprehensive political solution taking into account the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people” — as the Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Syed Akbaruddin has stated. But that sagacious advice has been given repeatedly to both the warring factions over the months and has been ignored because no side wants to let the other gain the upper hand by scaling down the offensive. Since Syria has been left to itself to resolve the problem, both the Government and the rebels there have become more emboldened to continue their slaughter. Worse, as the situation deteriorates, there are reports that terror organisations such as the Al Qaeda have begun to infiltrate the ranks of the rebels, and in some cases they have formed their own strike groups. On the other hand, the Bashar al-Assad regime is backed by, Hezbollah, which is what is giving many countries, especially Israel, sleepless nights. In any case, outside intervention has already happened, with both the Government and the rebels receiving logistical and other supports from sympathisers abroad.
India's concerns are unlikely to weigh much with the US when it decides to hit. The latter would have struck by now had President Barack Obama not decided to first seek a broader consensus within the Congress for the decision, and Britain's Parliament had not voted against its country's military involvement in Syria. If the United Nations' inspectors who recently visited Syria to determine if the Assad regime had used chemical weapons against civilians, report in the affirmative, nothing can prevent the inevitable.