Some in the West are suggesting arming the Syrian opposition after the United Nations Security Council failed to approve a lopsided resolution aimed at toppling Syrian President Bashar al-Assad earlier this month.

Attempts to stoke civil war in Syria are dangerous as they could further expose the country's ethnic and sectarian faultlines.

Further more, a bloody civil war in Syria will not only cost dearly for the Syrian people, but also have unpredictable strategic implications on the whole region.

Many observers in Russia and China fear that some Western countries are playing on the Syrian crisis to maximize their interests in the Middle East, shoring up support for a pro-Western opposition force rather than freeing the Syrian people.

Their intention to cultivate allies in Damascus was driven mostly by Syria's unique geographical importance, and its close ties with Iran, Hamas and Lebanon's armed group Hezbollah.

Pushing for "regime change" instead of dialogue is an obvious first step for Western powers to back proxies in the country.

It is worth noting that the al-Assad government is ready to start reforms that would substantively improve people's life and protect their rights.

A referendum on a draft constitution on Sunday will allow Syrian citizens to opt for new freedoms, end the monopoly on power of Assad's Baath Party and set a timetable for multiparty elections.

Under the new constitution, President al-Assad will end his two seven-year terms in 2014 at the latest and his family's 40-odd years of control over the country.

Al-Assad's plan, though far from being perfect, should serve as a starting point for further negotiations between the government and the opposition.

But foreign intervention, in the form of financial support and military aid for anti-government protests, could halt reforms and force a desperate al-Assad government to fight to the end.

As Western governments are drumming up reasons for intervention, Western media have also stoked fears that a humanitarian crisis is brewing across the country if al-Assad is not removed from power immediately.

In simple and often powerful language, they presented international audience a flat argument of the Syrian crisis, targeting al-Assad as the primary cause of bloodshed while ignoring the fact that some opposition forces have also resorted to violence.

In the troubled Syria, where media access is heavily restricted, obtaining first-hand account of the situations and offering balanced reports is extremely difficult. But that should not become an excuse for Western media to uncritically parrot activists' claims that cannot be verified independently.

The Syrian deadlock is characterized by an overwhelming external call for al-Assad's removal and the silent majority of the Syrian people.

Whether the Syrians want prolonged unrest or immediate peace talks is unknown to most outsiders, and cannot be decided by the outsiders, either. Only the Syrians can speak for themselves on how to resolve the conflict in their country.