By Perrin Clark ’15, Staff Writer

It seems that every week there is one news story or controversy that dominates the headlines and then slips back into obscurity. We saw this pattern evolve when President Obama considered conducting limited strikes against Syrian President Bashar Al Assad’s military for using chemical weapons against innocent civilians. The fallout was that the United States backed out of its military threat, and Syria appeared willing to give up its chemical weapons per an agreement brokered by Russian President Vladamir Putin. Later, the UN Security Council voted to eliminate Syria’s stockpile of chemical weapons. Many believe US foreign policy triumphed in the region.  However, many do not see hope in this development. For example, as Vihar Deshu ‘15 said: “I don’t believe there is a difference between killing through chemical weapons and killing by any other means, so the slaughter of civilians won’t stop.” Indeed, the Syrian crisis is not over, and recent developments have the potential to bring new controversies to center stage once more.

A rift has formed among the Syrian opposition as it has become increasingly difficult to support rebels who are not in league with Al-Qaeda and other radical Islamic groups — while the government may be a danger to its own people, America can not indiscriminately support the rebels. Ruby Gould ‘15 articulated this point, saying, “although we are against the Syrian government based on their use of chemical weapons, this doesn’t mean that we should be in support of the Syrian rebels.“ In fact, 11 rebel factions issued a statement that they want an Islamic state that is allied with Al-Qaeda to replace Al Assad’s government. They also stated that the exiled leadership of the Syrian opposition is out of touch with the Rebels’ war, and deserves no say regarding the future of Syria’s government. Politicians emphasize the need to help the more moderate rebels in Syria, but one must ask: are we pursuing our own national security interests as these developments unfold? This splintering of factions could not only influence our foreign policy, but could possibly influence the outcome of the war. If the American government faces public pressure to stop arming the rebels, they could be caught in a losing battle. Furthermore, as the rebel groups splinter, their lack of coordination and unity will increase. This development would ultimately play in the favor of Syrian security forces. US foreign policy is in a conundrum, as there is extreme volatility and ambiguity on both sides of the conflict.

Despite the developments in the Syrian opposition, these news stories have not received sufficient news coverage. People want to believe that the problem has been solved; media has focused its attention on the United Nations vote to dismantle Syria’s chemical weapons. However, other questions arise from this resolution, as it does not represent binding authority. Will Syria comply with the Security Council? If not, will the need for military intervention arise again? These questions cannot be ignored, as the situation in Syria is an ongoing one.  Though the media may not focus on it, US citizens should be aware that policy towards Syria in the near future is something that could change as more news comes out.

Regardless of how one views these developments, they raise an important truth that no current event simply ends, or is resolved, once it ceases being a top news story. Instead, developments that shape world events can happen behind the scenes, and require someone to look beyond the newspaper’s front page. New stories unfold every day, and media coverage is a zero sum game; giving special attention to a certain story requires taking attention away from another. The patterns of media coverage with regard to Syria emphasize this crucial point—that one must read the news with a critical eye in order to get a realistic idea of what is going on in the world. At Newark Academy, it is often difficult to take the time to really delve into researching current events, especially when they are as complex as  Syria. Hopefully we can all understand the context of media coverage, and take some time to look beyond the newspaper’s front page.