To me it's morally indefensible that we maintain our pig-headed stance that "Assad must go" when we do so clearly to placate our "friends" in Riyadh, who in the long-term are anything but. Over many years we have shown that we are quite happy to be on civil terms with strongmen who keep their countries in order, most recently Presidents Xi and Sisi (and of course the al-Saud themselves). The fact we take a different stance over Assad is totally inconsistent, hypocritical and arrogant. Obama and Cameron were blinded by hubris in 2011 when they declared who would be on the 'right' and 'wrong' sides of history, not thinking for a second that history might refuse to follow the path set out in their idealistic liberal playbook.
There is a morally-sound middle ground somewhere between "propping up dictators" in the manner exemplified by Putin's support to Assad, and calling for (or implementing) regime change as the West has so disastrously tried on many occasions. We've found that middle ground in our relations with China and Egypt. Time to apply the same principle in Syria.
Last edited by Easy Street; 7th Nov 2015 at 11:18.