Things Will Get Worse Before They Get Better

What are the consequences of a military strike on Syria?

By Michael Beevers, assistant professor of environmental studies

Syria is a humanitarian catastrophe. Two million people have fled the country's escalating violence and live crowded and hungry in refugee camps. For those unable or unwilling to leave, the situation is much worse. Death, trauma, sickness and displacement linger on a daily basis. Access to clean water and inadequate sanitation foreshadow health problems to come. Despite international aid, food is scarce as local agricultural production grinds to a halt and prices for available food commodities skyrocket.

The question is whether military strikes by the U.S. and its partners will improve the situation. The "certain uncertainty" of war makes it difficult to know. Over the short term, it seems unlikely that the humanitarian situation will drastically improve because the immediate needs of the people are so vast, and rebuilding critical infrastructure takes so long. Over the longer term, much depends on the strategic objectives of the military strikes, the actions of rebel fighters and opposition groups and the resolve of the Syrian regime to stay in power. In a best-case scenario, the strikes help topple the regime and the resulting power vacuum is quickly filled by a provisional government that allows humanitarian assistance to address the needs of the people. At worst, the strikes harden the regime and fuel internal violence in ways that create more hardship, chaos and destruction. The reality is probably somewhere in the middle, and U.S. strikes or not, the Syrian people will continue to suffer.

Read more Dickinson faculty perspectives on Syria.

Published September 7, 2013