HABIB is an Arab Turk who migrated to Canada many years ago. He now lives in St John in the province of New Brunswick with his wife and son. We meet on the small market square in St Andrews where I spend part of every other summer. Habib sets up his little stall on Saturday, together with farmers, craftsmen, and vendors of cheese, honey and smoked fish.

Here, he sells Turkish snacks, salads and baklavah. He is delighted to see me, and I try out my rusty, limited Turkish. Generally, we exchange meaningless pleasantries, but when I was in St Andrews a couple of months ago, he was very serious and took me to one side.

“You are a writer, Irfan Bey,” he whispered urgently. “You must write the truth about what’s happening in Syria.” I said something sympathetic about the negative impact of the uprising on the Turkish border towns that now have tens of thousands of refugees. “No, no!” Habib exclaimed. “I want you to tell your readers about the plot to break up Syria. I have many relatives there, and they are fed up of the fighting. The so-called freedom fighters are thugs who want to grab power with the support of outside powers.”

I went away a bit puzzled: why would a Turk support what the Syrian government is doing? Later, I learned that during its mandate over Syria after the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire following its defeat in the First World War, France ceded a slice of Syria to Turkey to ensure its neutrality in the next global conflict. Thus, villages and families were divided by the new border, and many ethnic Arabs are now Turkish citizens. Habib’s family belong to the Alawite minority, and they have not fared well in Turkey. There is also a large minority of Alevis in Turkey, and they too have suffered centuries of discrimination.

Many Syrians support the Assad regime as well. Apart from the ruling Alawites, Christians and Druzes dread the prospect of an Islamic takeover. And the possibility of this happening is increasing as jihadis pour into Syria. Although they are still in a minority among rebel forces, they are the best organised and funded.

This is one reason why Western states are reluctant to provide the fighters with modern weapons. Washington, having armed the mujahideen in Afghanistan and then seen these weapons turned against them, is especially cautious. Also, there are few heroes in this battle: while the Assad regime has certainly been brutal in its attempts to quell the rebellion, resistance forces have many atrocities to be ashamed of.

In the vicious fighting that has been escalating for some 19 months, civilians have suffered many horrors. Caught in the crossfire, men, women and children have been killed in their thousands. Food and medicines are in short supply in many parts of the country, and refugees are leaving their homes in large numbers.

The world looks on in horror, but remains paralysed. Oman and Saudi Arabia are allegedly supplying arms and cash via Turkey.

The US and its allies would be delighted to see Assad’s regime fall as it is allied with Iran and Hezbollah, both of whom are implacably opposed to Israel. Many in the West are champing at the bit to intervene militarily.

What has enforced restraint is the determination in Moscow and Beijing not to see a repeat of Libya. Here, they went along with a Security Council resolution for air cover to protect civilians. This limited mandate was stretched beyond breaking point by Nato to drive Qadhafi from power, and to his ultimate death. China and Russia are not willing to fall into the same trap again.

Another factor driving the conflict is the Shia-Sunni divide. Alawites are a branch of Shias, and have ruled Syria despite being in the minority. Now Sunnis are up in arms, and are supported by the Saudis who would be happy to see a Shia regime toppled. Turkey, too, is largely Sunni.

The big unknown is what Syria would look like if and when Bashar al-Assad is toppled. The fear is that it would fragment along sectarian and ethnic lines with the Alawites withdrawing to a coastal strip; the Druzes carving out their territory near the Lebanese border; and the Kurds finally achieving statehood in the mountains. The worst-case scenario is a bloodbath with the minorities being subjected to ethnic and sectarian cleansing.

As we have seen in Iraq, Saddam Hussein, for all his many flaws and murderous ways, was a secular dictator who held his diverse country together. Women and minorities had equal rights and played a major role in Iraq’s development. Removing him has unleashed an unending wave of violence. It has also resulted in the mass migration of Christians, the oppression of women, and the increasing marginalisation of the minority Sunnis.

It is true that the removal of long-entrenched dictatorships unleashes emotions and prejudices that were long pent up. We have seen this happen when Communist Yugoslavia broke up, and long dormant demons were released. Christian Serbs settled scores for centuries of living under the Ottoman yoke. Of course their Bosnian Muslim victims had nothing to do with any past misdeeds by Ottoman governors, but ethnic and sectarian hatred has little logic.

So there are no clear lines in Syria: while all decent people must oppose the kind of violence we see in Syria today, the grim reality is that Assad’s departure might well trigger even greater bloodshed.

Several senior leaders of the Free Syrian Army and its political arm have accused the world community of ignoring their plight. They have gone on to warn that the longer they wait to intervene, the greater the chances of an Islamist takeover. I suspect this is a desperate ploy to force the West to take action.

The truth is that there is little stomach in Washington to launch yet another military operation in a Muslim country, especially one as complex and large as Syria. From the way things are going, the endgame may drag on for a lot longer than any of us had suspected.