Syria in the worst position ever

When neoconservatives and so-called liberals agree on what the specific policy to follow should be, it is highly likely that a country under threat from this possible consensus will be dealt with severely.
Martin Indyk of the Brookings Institute (ex-US ambassador to Israel, and ex-director of AIPAC) said in the Financial Times that Syria should come clean, lest severe sanctions would ensue and that Bashar is a “weak and maladroit Syrian president” with a “rogue regime”.
This comes closer to the official position barked by hawkish right-wing think-tanks like the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. WINEP’s “scholars” are working hard – using their expertise – to advocate policies for the US but also for Assad, such as opening the political system for the “majority Arab Sunnis and ethnic and religious minorities, centralizing power in the hands of his own Alawi clan”.
Now how’s that going to happen? On what kind of understanding of politics is this policy based?
How can you open up the system but centralize in the hand of a tribe (although the centralization part is already there)? And why would this be good to Syria?
When reading the list of policy recommendations I see that there main objective is to help the US manage the region, and is not specifically in Syria’s own interests.
But what this author (Robert Rabil) says out in the open with no subtelty whatsoever, Martin Indyk says it with wit, and diplomacy.

3 Replies to “Syria in the worst position ever”

  1. Bech, I am going to hear Martin Indyk, Flynt Leverett and Ammar Abdulhamid wax on all things lebanon on thursday so I will post a report then. Perhaps because I am an old man, I tend to discount the notion of radical rupture and eschew the use of superlatives. I cannot for the life of me see how anything has changed. I do, however, take a perverse pleasure in seeing that Israel vis-a-vis Syria has now been reduced to a sideline cheerleader, now that the US is directly managing the Syria file. Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it…

  2. I think the best example to your question on how are this hawkish right-wing think-tanks are going to manege to put their policies in practice is Irak. With this so called solution plans to stabilice the region, wich have no base in reality, the only thing they achive is Kaos.

    Destabilizing syria can never be a way to garantee stability in Lebanon.

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s