The chemical attack on the Ghouta region of Syria has forced the world to discuss intervention in Syria, but is intervention more about maintaining the international image of the US and France?
What benefits could military intervention bring to the Syrian conflict? Is the motivation for a punitive attack to make sure the US doesn’t lose credibility over Obama’s infamous red-line remark?
The UK is to propose a UN Security Council resolution today which would authorise “necessary measures to protect civilians” in Syria.
The West has been united in its condemnation of the chemical weapons attack in Ghouta, laying the blame squarely on Assad’s forces, but Russia has downplayed the importance of the attack and the need for international military intervention in the ongoing civil war.
The reports of a chemical weapons attack on the outskirts of Damascus has caused condemnation from around the world, with Russia backing a UN investigation into the claims and US President Obama calling it a “grave concern”.