Military Intervention against Syria is now possible

Thanks to ‘experts’ like Dennis Ross from the hawkish Washington Institute for Near East Policy delusional ideas such as quoted below can become actual US foreign policy:

Ironically, the threat to the regime today might come more from those within Syria who feel that to forestall international sanctions, the regime must be removed. The fear of the Muslim Brotherhood is unlikely to deter a military-led coup, particularly because the military (which is essentially secular) might see itself as the protector of Syria against the Brotherhood. As such, the alternative to President Asad’s Alawi faction might not be the Muslim Brotherhood but a military-led Sunni-Alawi dominated regime. It wouldn’t be democratic, but it would seek to reduce Syria’s isolation.

Isn’t it what the US has been hoping for to the point of pushing Syria into more isolation. The killing of Hariri (a Sunni leader let’s remember) is coincidentally a very favorable event for such a coalition to form against the ‘isolaters’ who ‘drove us out of Lebanon’, etc.
I advise everyone to take a Strategy 101 class if this is still not obvious.
Deal was broken or a promise was not kept. If some Syrians along with Lebanese allies have killed Hariri they must have received assurance before acting from someone playing double standards within different groups in Syria.

2 Replies to “Military Intervention against Syria is now possible”

  1. I don’t think so, Bech. First of all, there are too many pieces in play — Iraq and Iran — and the Israelis have asked the Americans to proceed cautiously with respect to Syria. Syria will be tied to the whipping post for the next 6 months to a year and there will be a lot of strong language coming out of Washington. But this is all bark, and no bite. At most, the US will pursue sanctions. To achieve UNSC sanctions, which Russia, China and maybe France oppose, the US will adopt a maximalist position and threaten — if obliquely — the use of force to topple the regime in order to secure sanctions. I think Mssr. Assad did a good job yesterday calling the American bluff; I think he will also get out of sanctions, but the rhetorical guns will keep firing for some time. Of course, one can argue that the US is targeting Syria as a first step toward isolating Iran, but this is to put too much faith in US planning. And quite frankly, the will is not there for another engagement. All bets, however, come off the table if something specatacular happens and the Americans can link it to Syria, but I think this is doubtful. However, be mindful that I thought the most recent US invasion of Iraq would never happen, so what do I know. In my defense, I was locked away in a small Mediterranean country at the time and did not have my ear to the rail and thus could not anticipate the coming “democracy express.” be very well ….

  2. you said it yourself davidov, you were wrong about Iraq. you may also be overly optimistic this time too.
    I think the US and others are desperately looking for an alternative to Bashar even if this means botching the job and turning syria into an islamic republic.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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