U.S. grasps for way to help in Syria

A member of the Free Syrian Army aims during weapons training outside Idlib, Syria, Feb. 7, 2012. / AP

WASHINGTON - The United States is looking for ways to help Syrians struggling against a government crackdown, but the number of effective options appear limited.

The Obama administration says it is not considering invading Syria or arming its rebels to remove President Bashar Assad from power. Diplomatic efforts at the U.N. have collapsed. Spokesman Jay Carney has said that at this point, U.S. efforts are focused on exploring the possibility of providing humanitarian aid to the Syrian people.

But those efforts may only bandage over the violence instead of stopping it.

For now, Washington is relying primarily on what it has been doing for the past 11 months in a so-far unsuccessful bid to force Assad's government to end its bloody offensive on opponents: sanctions targeting the Syrian regime and isolating it from the world economy.

U.S. mulls humanitarian aid, not arms, for Syrian rebels
Syria resistance worried about regime air power
Anonymous breaks into Assad's server

It is also borrowing somewhat from a strategy used in Libya's civil war, assembling a group of like-minded nations, led by Arab governments, to coordinate an international strategy against Assad. The goal is to pressure the Syrian leader into accepting an Arab-proposed plan to transfer power to his vice president and allow for a transition to democracy.

"We are working with our partners again to ratchet up the pressure, ratchet up the isolation on Assad and his regime," White House press secretary Jay Carney said Tuesday. "That pressure is having an impact. Ultimately, it needs to result in Assad ceasing the violence, stopping the brutality and allowing for a transition supported by the Syrian people."

A senior EU official said Wednesday that the bloc will soon impose harsher sanctions against Syria, possibly including bans on the import of Syrian phosphates, on commercial flights between Syria and Europe, and on financial transactions with the country's central bank. The official spoke on condition of anonymity in keeping with EU rules.

It's unclear whether any of the U.S. strategies will produce the optimal result anytime soon.

Special section: The Arab Spring
Video: Int. pressure mounts on Syria, bombing of rebels resumes

Assad is receiving political backing from Russia and China, which delivered a double veto over the weekend of a U.N. resolution seeking his resignation. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who met with Assad in Damascus on Tuesday, said Wednesday that both Assad's regime and opposition forces were responsible for instigating the violence. Lavrov said Assad wants his vice president to hold talks with the opposition groups.

Sanctions may be crippling the Syrian economy but they have failed to impede security operations that have contributed to a death toll of more than 5,400 people since March. Syrian troops on Wednesday bombed residential neighborhoods in areas controlled by the rebels; activists said at least 50 people died in shelling of the central city of Homs. Assad's military remains formidable, even if it is being increasingly challenged by the rebel Free Syrian Army.

The diplomatic and military stalemates are prompting some leading voices in Washington to propose more drastic measures to back Syria's opposition, drawing parallels with America's support for the Libyan rebels who chased Moammar Gadhafi from power last year.

"We should start considering ... arming the opposition. The bloodletting has got to stop," Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said. Sending weapons to Syria's rebels is more difficult than in Libya because they don't control a base as rebels there did in Benghazi, McCain said, but he insisted it should be done.

McCain spoke of coordinating any such action with U.S. ally Turkey, whose foreign minister is meeting with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Wednesday. Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., also urged assistance to the Free Syrian Army, which remains a ragtag band of isolated militia without command structure or sufficient means to truly threaten Assad's grip on power.

(While the Assad government has banned independent reporting within Syria, CBS News correspondent Clarissa Ward was able to sneak in and spend time with the rebels fighting to overthrow the regime. Click the player at left for Ward's full report.)

Arming and supporting Syrian rebels in a proxy effort to oust Assad is a risky proposition. The threat of an all-out civil war might prompt Syria's benefactors, from Russia to Iran, to lend greater military assistance and separate Syria's Sunni-led opposition from minorities that could then cling more tightly to Assad. This type of division would play into Assad's hands, U.S. officials have warned for months, and may only create an even more bloody and prolonged conflict.

Such a conflict also would raise pressure on the U.S. for military involvement in a part of the world where it just has extracted itself from eight years of war in Iraq. It also is still mired in a war in Afghanistan.

The administration rejected the call to arm the rebels.

"We are not considering that step right now," Carney told reporters Tuesday.

"We don't think more arms into Syria is the answer," echoed State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland, who noted that "some of these proposals that people are brooding about could not be done without foreign military intervention."

Anne-Marie Slaughter, the State Department's former director of policy planning and an early proponent of NATO intervention in Libya, said the administration should seek to rally Arab countries, Turkey and NATO allies in Europe around the idea of establishing safe zones in Syria for civilian protesters and soldiers wishing to defect from the army.

That would demand troops from Syria's Arab neighbors and possibly Turkey to monitor the zones, Slaughter noted in an opinion piece in the Financial Times. The plan would essentially create enclaves in Syria outside the government's control.

It is doubtful Assad would allow a foreign intervention of such a kind in his territory. Russia, which has refused to entertain even sanctions or a weapons ban on the Syrian government, also could respond with hostility.

The administration's energy seems focused right now on the much narrower goal of creating a contact group of countries that share the goal of stopping the violence and seeing Assad out of power. Nuland said Tuesday that would involve tougher sanctions by the U.S. and Syria's neighbors "to squeeze the money that he gets to continue to fuel his war machine."

"We're going to work with countries around the world to call out those who are still sending him weapons, and expose that," Nuland said. The group will look at helping Syria "plot a way forward and also to do what we can about the humanitarian situation."

Still, she recognized the limitations of that strategy.

"It's frankly not clear how much we're going to be able to do, but we want to help."

[karek40]

We could best help by keeping out of another nations civil war.

[Henri_Rochard]

Why bother ??

They overthrew the dictator in Egypt and Muslim fundamentalists won the free elections.

If there are elections in Syria, Muslim fundamentalists will win those too.

[usunus]

The United States loves to play the adult in the room under all circumstances.It has therefore taken the same stance in the Libyan attack vowing not to arm the rebels.It however let others on its side pour the stuff into Bemgazi.So,these pious words from Washington are just boilerplate.

[wlhoppers]

Here's a revelation: this is none of our business. Grasping for ways to help Syria? Why?

Why would the US even think about engaging in another foreign war? When are we going to learn to butt out and take care of our own first?

No wonder the world hates us and no wonder we're no longer a superpower. We're the "Gladys Kravitz" of the neighborhood.

[grewaconscience]

This conflict is tough to witness, but its only solution is diplomatic. Since the State Department is quick to trade our US jobs for diplomatic concessions why not use this principle in reverse? where by if China wants to continue importing to the US it must stop its veto of the UN security council's resolution asking for the removal of Al Assad (Russia is really of no consequence, the State Department knows that). Regardless of how painful and unfair this Syrian repression is to observe in idleness not a single US soldier should enter this conflict nor should any US fund be spent in Syria! we can't afford either of these options: we are broke! get it!

[snewsom2997]

The world is going to have to start figuring this stuff out on their own, and if they want to do something about it they need to do it, instead, of begging for the US military and then complaining about how we prosecute the war. Maybe it is time for the EU to get a military and start sharing the burden, because offering 1 Battalion or Regiment to help us while we throw divisions and BCT's at a problem, is almost insulting.

[rwsmith29456]

Easy, buzz up Nato and start providing 'air cover', then start bombing selected targets..... wait, haven't we heard this before?

[snewsom2997]

You have to at least ask the question how was Assad able to get both Syrians Christians and Jews to back him, instead of the opposition. This is a guy whose dad attacked Israel several times, but now, they are going to side with him. Who is the opposition, They are Assyrians, Kurds, and Turks, This is another one of those Shia/Sunni things, I don't recommend stepping in the middle of their religious war.

[starving1968-3]

by joe1022joe February 8, 2012 6:57 AM EST
Barak Hussein Obama. Now here's a guy you want making decisions about what to do concerning the Arabs - right?







So you oppose his killing Bin Laden and 22 of Al Qaeda's 30 most senior members?

The toppling of Qaddafi's reign?

[starving1968-3]

DO NOT GET INVOLVED!!!!!


HOW MANY BLOODY NOSES MUST WE SUFFER BEFORE WE FINALLY LEARN THE LESSON?!?!?!?!

[sirmarion-2009]

Why is the White House in such a rush to hurry us into another,spending,spending,spending,spending bash over a civil uprising that has nothing to do with us? Where are our real leaders when we need them to make the decision to keep us save and let our enemies kill each other off?