Just before I got in the bath, Martin Butcher, arms policy adviser for Oxfam, was on the BBC talking about Syria. I missed most of the interview, but he made three points at the end, to discourage support for the Syrian rebels, with all of which I disagree.
1. If the West arms the rebels, Russia and Iran will increase their deliveries.
Not arming the rebels hasn't discouraged them. They deliver tonnes of weaponry every week, it's probably reached saturation point. It was estimated a while ago that the régime is paying the Russians a billion dollars a month, and would run out of money by June. I could go on.
2. The FSA has no proper command and control structure.
Leaving aside how much truth there is in this (like many statements about the opposition, it has been widely retailed , while the actual statistics point in the opposite direction), when you are trying to overthrow the government, it is those with weapon supplies that can command allegiance.
3. The FSA collaborates with the Islamist of Jabhat-al-Nusra on a daily basis.
They're trying to overthrow the same dictator. What's the FSA supposed to do, say they'll have a war against al-Nusra first, or stoke up a peace pipe and hope all the bad people go away?
Kevin Maguire and Faye Adams were similarly anti supporting the rebels on Sky's press preview last night.
Fawaz Gerges has added:
1. There is no military solution to the conflict.
The rebels have beaten back the régime without much isolated support, so I think this is a hypothesis designed to support a conclusion.
2. This has mutated into a proxy war, no longer a fight between the opposition and the government.
It's a fight between the same Syrians who asked for justice in 2011, against a government bolstered by thousands of soldiers from Hezbollah, a lot of Russian and Iranian munitions, and diplomatic cover from Russia and China.
No comments:
Post a Comment