The myth of a political solution in SyriaI think this piece accurately explains where each state stands, even if I disagree somewhat with the motivation imputed; I think Iran's intransigence is due to the amount they've invested in maintaining control in Syria rather than doctrinal insanity, similarly Assad can't go and allow a democratic transition not just because of megalomania, but because the country is now so signed over to Tehran that any compromise that threatens their influence is unacceptable. That the other neighbours want a solution rather than the myth that they want to encourage jihadis to destabilise Syria is on the mark as is the UN's abandonment of the problem. Similarly I think empowering the Free Syrian Army is a better solution than foreign intervention, however well intentioned.
"If the Western countries do not feel the imminent danger that will result from the continued killing and destruction in Syria and are not suffering from the lack of a political solution and decisive military action, this does not apply to the Arab countries or to Turkey; the latter is living in the eye of the storm. This is either because the national security of these countries is suffering from serious threats resulting from the collapse of the Syrian state and the control of Tehran and the Revolutionary Guard forces (which are using Syria as a platform for aggression and pressure against its neighbours), or because of the political and humanitarian projections of the Syrian crisis on them. The Arab countries should not stand idly by and wait for the cancer of violence and fascism to spread; that is not in their best interest. They must make a move and force the UN and the rest of the world to stand behind them in order to defend their national interests and the interests of their people."