Why Did the Arab League Tyrants’ Club Finally Turn on Syria?

Member states of the Arab League are notorious for harsh treatment of their citizens and nonchalance about neighbors. But greater concern about regional stability and its effect on their own power have transformed attitudes. In March the league supported Western intervention in Libya and in November voted to suspend Syria for its relentless crackdowns on protesters. Civil war in Syria would be disastrous for neighboring states, contends Shashank Joshi in an opinion essay for the Telegraph. While Libya was estranged from the Arab world and Syria is ruled by the minority Alawite sect, he writes, “there’s something refreshingly reckless about the League’s newfound gumption.” Such gumption may push UN Security Council members Russia and China, typically reticent on such matters, to take a stand on human rights. Western intervention in Syria is tempting for quickly ending the bloodbath, yet Joshi contends that the Arab League taking a lead on Assad’s ouster would better ensure regional stability. Only with Arab League support can the entire international community unite on Syria. – YaleGlobal