Article content continued

Still, the question remains: Are we guilty for not “commanding” our politicians to save Syrians from their tormentors?

The problem is, we’ve been there, done that, and it didn’t turn out well. An American-led coalition invaded Iraq in 2003, handily defeated its military, deposed Saddam Hussein – and then lost the nation-building campaign. After initially welcoming their liberation, Iraqis soon turned against coalition troops, regarding them as infidel invaders. When Western troops left, they turned on each other.

This reality points up the difficulty of R2P. If it is to work it requires the West to have armies and administrators assume, in Ignatieff’s words, “temporary rule” of the failing state, but also the willingness of locals to be ruled by foreigners.

This is not an indefensible idea. In an increasingly chaotic world, Western countries might in their own defence need to invoke what theorist Robert Cooper refers to as “the imperialism of neighbours,” whereby they take charge of the failed state and provide good government, administrative competence and institutional order until the locals can do it themselves.

While plausible, the restore to empire lite, even to Cooper’s version, is unlikely given the anti-imperialist attitudes that prevail among Left-Lib progressives. They will wring their hands in self-righteous outrage at atrocities like those of Aleppo, but few would sully their ideological purity by assuming the responsibilities – and realities – of what used to be called the white man’s burden.

This being the case, perhaps they should avoid accusing others of depraved indifference.

Robert Sibley, a veteran Ottawa journalist, holds a PhD in political science from Carleton University, where he occasionally lectures on political philosophy.