Dr. Thomas Pierret:

When President Obama made the threat after the chemical attack he did not ask the Security Council if he could do it. He did it unilaterally, and it worked. We should not wait for the Russians to accept it because they will never do that. I do not see any reason for Russia to change its mind on Syria, especially after the crisis in Ukraine.

On that issue, I am in favour of unilateral action but in that respect the UN is inept. It is not even able to issue a strong verbal condemnation. When the first one was presented by the western countries in February 2012, which explicitly stated that this resolution cannot be used to justify military action, the Russians found a way to oppose it. We can expect anything from that kind of mechanism.

Reference was made to radical Islamists. Radical Islamists have an agenda but it is not one that is compatible with political transition and democracy in Syria. I agree with that but leaving Assad to do what he wants will not make these people weaker. It is empowering them. Their whole discourse is vindicated by the behaviour of the international community. The first statement from the front of support organisation sounded misplaced to most Syrians. They wondered what it was talking about and why it was bashing the West but many people now believe it was right from the onset. There were fears about encouraging regime change in Syria and the Muslim Brotherhood taking over but because of that policy we find ourselves faced with far more radical Islamists than the Muslim Brotherhood. That is a misguided approach to the conflict. Also, as I explained, seeing Assad as a bulwark against these people is a fundamental error. He needs them to survive because once they are gone, he will be gone too.