Saturday 22 June 2013

The ‘let-it-burn’ strategy in Syria

Syrian government soldiers stood in front of the clock tower flying the national flag in the main square of the city of Qusayr, in Syria’s central Homs province, on June 5, after the army claimed it had seized total control of it and the surrounding region.

This is quite perceptive.
"There is, of course, a danger that Iran and Hezbollah might enable Assad to suppress the Syrian uprising, thereby imposing their sway from Lebanon on the Mediterranean coast, through Syria and Iraq, and eastward to the borders of Afghanistan and Pakistan. But for now, they are spending down Iran’s dwindling reserves, while bleeding and being weakened in a war that could persist for many more years. And though Obama and his advisers appear understandably worried about Al Qaeda affiliates taking an ever-greater role in the Syrian revolution, those jihadists are mostly foreigners and would stand little chance of actually seizing power after the Assad mafia is overthrown."
This is a pernicious reading of the same facts, twisted 180⁰.
"On the other hand, the U.S. cadre of pundits, politicians and leaders found itself stymied. They typically seek regime change through two complementary scenarios: achieving a state of revolution via compliant media and social media, which manufactures consent and lays the ground for intervention.
UNSC resolutions on Syria repeatedly stumbled on Chinese and Russian vetoes, excluding UN-sanctioned intervention. Syria’s strong air defence, as well as the ‘no boots on the ground’ pledge kept America at bay. Washington was left to lead from behind, endorsing and backing a Qatari scenario increasingly appearing as a first stage intervention whose only goal was to create chaos and give America’s and Israel’s hawks time to ponder options for a large scale intervention, while Syria burns."
[http://rt.com/op-edge/assad-syria-revolution-crisis-879/]

No comments:

Post a Comment