Assad endures - Telegraph It was a only a few weeks ago, at the G8 summit in Northern Ireland, that David Cameron was demanding the removal of Syria's president, Bashar al-Assad, claiming that he had "blood on his hands" and that it was "unthinkable" that he could play any part in Syria's future. Yet it now seems increasingly likely that, far from being forced from office, President Assad will retain control of much of the country. Certainly the recent successes recorded by pro-Assad forces appear to have had a disastrous impact on the morale of rebel fighters, with hundreds deciding to take advantage of an amnesty offered by Damascus to surrender their weapons and give up the fight. This remarkable turnaround is in part due to the unstinting backing Damascus has received from its allies, Russia and Iran, both in terms of military support and diplomatic cover - especially Moscow's refusal to sanction any UN resolution authorising intervention. The rebels" cause, meanwhile, has been undermined by constant infighting and attempts by Islamist militants to hijack the opposition agenda; the presence of fighters with links to al-Qaeda has been one of the main reasons why those who wanted to arm the rebels have grown more cautious. Faced with the awful complexities of the Syrian insurrection, the West collectively decided that the costs of intervention were too high. That may well have been the right decision. But inaction has its costs, too. With President Assad and his backers in Moscow and Tehran looking increasingly confident, those powers that demanded his overthrow - such as Britain, France and the US - look impotent and weak. Rather than convening international conferences to consider Syria's future, they must now start thinking about how to deal with a regime clinging tenaciously to power.