Do democracies have the guts for diplomacy on Syria? – asked Mark Leonard in Reuters Online on 3 June, 2013. Click here

Beyond the simplistic solution of removing Assad, Syria is a veritable
proxy war for a complicated tangled web of interlocking domestic and
foreign forces.

These include the Shiites v Sunni regional struggle (Iran v the Arabs);
the political, if not physical survival, of the ruling Syrian Alawites;
Russia's naval base in Tartus in Syria linked to its Black Sea assets
and Mediterranean influence; America's desire to undermine Iran by weakening, if not breaking up, its
Syria-connected power levers of Lebanon and Hizbullah; the Israeli
factor and the America-Israeli alliance; regional anti-Israeli
sentiments pending a genuine Palestinian statehood supported by a
credible two- state solution including the West bank; Syria's
territorial claim of part of the West Bank seized by Israel; the fractious
rivalry amongst the Syria's rebel groups; their links with Al Qaeda
trying to fish in troubled waters; Obama's unwillingness to get dragged
into another Middle East war by going along with his hawkish deputies;
China's concern with energy security by maintaining good relations with
Iran, and indeed with Israel and all other players; both Russia and
China's consistent faith in a diplomatic solution; their unwillingness
to give legitimacy to a solution through military or other forms of
coercion, the Right to Protect (R2P) notwithstanding; one can go on.

Until all parties are sufficiently reconciled, it seems likely that
Syria will stand out like a bloody thumb or worse for a fairly long time
if real politics are given a free rein.

This ought to be the job of the United Nations. If only key Members see
beyond their national interests. Unfortunately, they seldom do.