Local truces aside, the ingredients for a long Syrian war are all still in place
"Given that the rebels are at present divided,"
They are united about overthrowing Assad.
"lacking popular support"
No.
"and on the retreat,"
According to Patrick Cockburn's mates in the Syrian Army in Homs and Damascus.
"it may take years of warfare before they and their Western and regional backers can dictate surrender terms to the other side."
Then maybe these backers should hand over sufficient weaponry for them to be able to take down a dictator they have fought to a standstill with David v Goliath disparities of armament.
But wait.
"It could happen more quickly only if the Assad government and the Syrian army were shorn of support from Russia, Iran and Hezbollah, something that, so far, is not happening."
Now maybe if we'd focused on that...
But wait.
"If anything, the struggle for the Ukraine between the West and Moscow is likely to make the Russians even more determined not to see their status as a great power eroded by defeat in Syria."
This is just reporting Russian desires as immutable necessities. All along Cockburn has told us that if the cost is raised to the Russians of staying with Assad, they will respond by doubling down on him. The events in the near-abroad, as Russian foreign policy calls its ex-colonial possessions, are likely to impact more, but the logical lesson would be that pissing off too many people may lead to foreign policy failures.
"These appointments do not mean any reduction in direct Saudi support for the rebels but they do denote a policy more closely aligned with the US."
You realise at this point that Cockburn's analysis is useless. The Saudis are in dispute with the US about whether they can supply the rebels with anti-aircraft weapons, which is not lessened by Bandar's replacement.
"It is naive in these circumstances to imagine that the dispatch of shoulder-held anti-aircraft or anti-tank weapons, as is now predicted, is going to make the rebels more successful. Journalists, intelligence officers and rebels tend to be over-impressed by the idea that arms such as these make much difference."
Cockburn is like those other journalists and intelligence officers who don't care if those weapons would stop Assad's attacks on civilians.
"One of the big mistakes of the opposition and its backers has been to allow the question of who rules in Damascus to become part of the hot and cold war between Iran and its enemies, and between Shia and Sunni, conflicts that have been going on since the Iranian revolution in 1979."
It is Cockburn and his like who have been trying to make out that this is all about the Sunni-Shia difference,about Iran and not about a dictator and a people that have had enough.
They are united about overthrowing Assad.
"lacking popular support"
No.
"and on the retreat,"
According to Patrick Cockburn's mates in the Syrian Army in Homs and Damascus.
"it may take years of warfare before they and their Western and regional backers can dictate surrender terms to the other side."
Then maybe these backers should hand over sufficient weaponry for them to be able to take down a dictator they have fought to a standstill with David v Goliath disparities of armament.
But wait.
"It could happen more quickly only if the Assad government and the Syrian army were shorn of support from Russia, Iran and Hezbollah, something that, so far, is not happening."
Now maybe if we'd focused on that...
But wait.
"If anything, the struggle for the Ukraine between the West and Moscow is likely to make the Russians even more determined not to see their status as a great power eroded by defeat in Syria."
This is just reporting Russian desires as immutable necessities. All along Cockburn has told us that if the cost is raised to the Russians of staying with Assad, they will respond by doubling down on him. The events in the near-abroad, as Russian foreign policy calls its ex-colonial possessions, are likely to impact more, but the logical lesson would be that pissing off too many people may lead to foreign policy failures.
"These appointments do not mean any reduction in direct Saudi support for the rebels but they do denote a policy more closely aligned with the US."
You realise at this point that Cockburn's analysis is useless. The Saudis are in dispute with the US about whether they can supply the rebels with anti-aircraft weapons, which is not lessened by Bandar's replacement.
"It is naive in these circumstances to imagine that the dispatch of shoulder-held anti-aircraft or anti-tank weapons, as is now predicted, is going to make the rebels more successful. Journalists, intelligence officers and rebels tend to be over-impressed by the idea that arms such as these make much difference."
Cockburn is like those other journalists and intelligence officers who don't care if those weapons would stop Assad's attacks on civilians.
"One of the big mistakes of the opposition and its backers has been to allow the question of who rules in Damascus to become part of the hot and cold war between Iran and its enemies, and between Shia and Sunni, conflicts that have been going on since the Iranian revolution in 1979."
It is Cockburn and his like who have been trying to make out that this is all about the Sunni-Shia difference,about Iran and not about a dictator and a people that have had enough.
No comments:
Post a Comment