Hafiz Al Assad, the late father of the beleaguered president of Syria, Bashar Al Assad, was often compared to Otto von Bismarck, the Prussian statesman who, master of realpolitik and manipulation, achieved the unification of Germany in the late 19th century.

Hafiz had come to power through a bloodless coup d’état in 1970, following the disastrous intervention of Syrian forces on the side of the Palestinians as they confronted Jordan’s King Hussain in the infamous Black September. He quickly concentrated power in his own hands, banning any opposition in any election, and maintained the state of emergency. He established an authoritarian regime that perpetuated his rule for 30 years, ruthlessly suppressing any dissent, masterfully manipulating friends and foes.

When Hafiz died in 2000, he was succeeded by his son Bashar. But Bashar was no Middle Eastern Bismarck. He was trained as a doctor and had shown little interest in politics. If the father’s most distinguished political characteristic was his mastery of realpolitik; the son’s most obvious political characteristic is self-delusion.

For a brief period, it was hoped that he would be implementing economic and political reforms and dismantling the old regime. He had read the mood of the people right, but instead of moving forcefully full steam ahead, he procrastinated; and despite some measures of economic liberalisation, whose benefits accrued mainly to the new business elites, urgent issues of social justice and political freedom remained unaddressed and the people’s anger was allowed to simmer.

Inspired by the revolutionary wind sweeping across the Arab world in early 2011, the Syrian people took to the streets to demand social justice and democratic reforms.

Bashar proved inept at reading the mood of the Syrian people in revolt and despite the examples of Tunisia and Egypt, he convinced himself to dismiss the legitimacy of the protest movement. He maintained all along, as he told a Turkish newspaper recently, that the protest movement was an “incident” emanating and supported from outside Syria, driven by radical Islamists who infiltrated Syria, whom he describes as “terrorists” with advanced weapons.

If Bashar can delude himself into believing this nonsensical dismissal of the legitimacy of the protest movement, how can he justify firing on peaceful protesters? By various estimates, more than 5,000 people (possibly double that) have been killed, most of whom were non-combatants. In the chaos that is inexorably pushing Syria towards an outright civil war, contradictory reports show that the government and the opposition blame each other for horrible massacres. Regardless of how the president rationalises the horrible killing of his own people, he ought to wake up from this nightmare and listen to what the international community is saying.

US President Barack Obama, has condemned the Syrian regime for committing atrocities against its own people. Obama stated: “I strongly condemn the Syrian government’s unspeakable assault ... Al Assad must halt his campaign of killing and crimes against his own people now ...”

The last UN Human Rights Council report states that crimes against humanity are being committed in Syria and that people are being tortured. The Council overwhelmingly passed a resolution describing the situation in Syria as “a man-made humanitarian disaster”.

Even the Arab League could not overlook the atrocities committed in Syria and moved to suspend the latter’s membership. Many Arab states downgraded their diplomatic relations with Syria.

At the United Nations General Assembly where Russia and China cannot use their vetoes to protect the Al Assad regime, as they have done at the Security Council; more than 137 countries voted for a General Assembly resolution condemning the Syrian regime’s violence. The resolution expressed support for an Arab League transition plan that calls on President Bashar Al Assad to give up power, to hold early elections and form a “national unity government.”

At the humanitarian level, the crisis in Syria is a disaster that requires concerted effort to contain. For instance the hundreds of thousands of internally displaced persons may overwhelm the resources available to assist them in neighbouring countries such as Turkey, if they decided to cross the borders in large numbers.

At the geopolitical level, the crisis in Syria has produced strategic calculations of coalitions and regional alliances. On the one side Iran, Syria and Hezbollah in Lebanon are pitted against Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia, Europe, the US and Israel. Moreover, Syria shares borders with Turkey, Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan and Israel.

It is the kind of balance of power that Hafiz used to excel at manipulating and for which Bashar is demonstrably ill-equipped.

At the political level, Bashar’s slow reaction and self-delusion about the origins of the protest movement has led to bloody scenes in which his regime is systematically killing its own people. The Bashar Al Assad regime has thus forfeited any legitimacy it may have had in representing the people. It ought to step aside and let the Syrian people have their long-denied democratic rights and freedom.

The rapid deterioration of the situation in Syria and the growing loss of innocent lives are such that the situation justifies international intervention, notwithstanding article two of the UN Charter which forbids interference in matters of domestic jurisdiction of other member states.

If Russia or China prevent the adoption of a UN Security Council resolution authorising intervention, other alternatives should be explored. The US may not be willing to openly intervene in Syria in an election year. They can lead the call for the formation of a “Coalition of the Willings”. The international community has a duty to prevent and stop the systematic killing of innocent people. And it should not wait until a bigger humanitarian disaster happens, to be moved into action.

Adel Safty is distinguished visiting professor and Special Adviser to the Rector at the Siberian Academy of Public Administration, Russia. His book, ‘Might Over Right’, is endorsed by Noam Chomsky and published in England by Garnet, 2009.