September 6, 2013

The use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime in Syria has increased the atrocities in an already tragic situation. With more than 1,400 people killed in a single attack, the U.S. has found itself facing a dilemma: Do we allow the flagrant violation of an international prohibition on the use of chemical weapons to go unanswered, or do we enforce the international norms protecting civilians from their use?

We at the Muslim Public Affairs Council believe that military force should never be a first or even second resort to settling a conflict. This is why we spoke out vehemently against the invasion of Iraq and have written repeatedly about the preference of use of diplomacy over military power. However, there are times when we must listen to our conscience and not sit idly by as hundreds of thousands of people are slaughtered by a dictator.

SEE: FAQs on our stance

We therefore support decisive and quick military action in Syria with important conditions.

Intervention of any kind must be a deliberative process with the ultimate goal of lessening the suffering of the Syrian people and leading to an end to the conflict. The military strikes must be executed in a way that will minimize civilian casualties while at the same time changing the balance of power on the ground so as to move the Assad regime toward a political resolution. We are opposed to any troops on the ground, and the international community must ensure the economic and humanitarian rebuilding of Syria as a top priority after the conflict has ended.

Conditional intervention, with clear goals and strategies, will save more Syrian lives than non-intervention. Basing our decision on the Islamic values of establishing justice and preserving human life, we support conditional military intervention in Syria.

DOWNLOAD IT NOW:
“MPAC Position Paper: On Intervention in Syria”