Light of the day is a blessing for everyone. It emphasizes that we have another opportunity to see what the day holds for us. September 2 was the same. Or at least we thought it was.

When the sun shined along the Bodrum, Turkey we found a little Aylan Kurdi washed ashore. We had no idea why, and for how long, he had drifted against the Mediterranean waves.  The ‘Internet exploded’ with the image of the dead three-year-old boy… who had finally reached Europe. This was perhaps the point when people started to understand the Syrian conflict and the massive migration that is taking place… and the severity of both.

In any conflict there are various theories that explain its raison d’etre. The theories are then refuted years later when the situation calms down. The same was true for the invasion of Iraq. There was hostility, doubt, possibility of weapons… but years later when someone in Washington had the audacity to finally check the data, the invasion was declared an ‘error of judgment’ that bombed Iraqis to ashes. The same is true with the other Middle East crises. There are various ways of theorizing them.

I aim to detail all the possible ways of understanding why Aylan met the fate he did. The first theory discusses an oil pipeline and a dictator.

As per some news sources Syria was to sign an oil pipeline agreement that would have allowed the Gulf nations, mainly Saudi Arabia and Qatar, to expand their horizons. It was coupled with a massive drop in oil prices that badly hit the Russian economy. Syria instead signed the deal with Iran – the ‘bad’ Muslim country of the Middle East. What Saudi Arabia now needed was a case in favor of democracy and Bashar-al-Assad provided the best possible case. As America emphasizes the importance of democracy in oil rich countries, it did not hesitate in raising rebels to free Syria from the reckless Assad. It had previously done the same for Gaddafi.  Libyan rebels were raised the same way but when the conflict in Syria started, and the emerging ISIS made new recruits, it became rather difficult for the US and other stakeholders to distinguish those who were financed in Libya and those who were then bombed in Syria.

This brings us to our second theory. Since US cannot openly engage in wars in the nuclear laden world we are living in now, it aims to fight a series of proxy wars in which the emerging Iran and China could be exhausted both economically and militarily. Hence, while Syrians were called to fight for their rights Bashar-al-Assad was able to hold back because of the continuous support of Iran. And this has dragged on for four years… and then US and Iran signed a historic nuclear deal.

Then there is the third theory. It addresses the Middle East crisis as a geographical breakdown of the traditional boundaries of these countries which need to be readdressed as per the ethnic similarities in the cross-border regions. Some address it as the formation of a Shiite arc from Syria to Iran and then Iraq.

There is little chance that these possibilities are completely independent of one another. The entire situation is a combination of all these. What the political analysts have to find now is their respective degree of involvement.

However, the complexity of the situation does not end here. There are many migrants still afloat, not knowing what the seas hold for them and for how long it will be till they return home.  While they all head to Europe, the rich neighbors who haven’t done anything in ensuring rehabilitation of these refugees, are being castigated.

Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf countries have one of the highest per capita incomes in the world. And while it has used petrodollars to deal with rebels, it is incompetent in dealing with the refugees.

With Europe now enforcing a quota system on the number of refugees each country will take in, the world must prepare itself for more Aylan Kurdis on the coasts of the Mediterranean. The amount of inaction that is taking place with the entire country emptying, it is highly likely that the war in Syria will drag on for a long time till all possible strategic interests are met.