Syria's revolution had too many enemies

 Simon Assaf

 I think this shows deficiencies in Simon's politics, not seeing that there are revolutionaries in their millions, but restricting the term to those who agree with the SWP.

 "For now the revolutionaries have been sidelined."

 Asking for arms is not the same as to put your faith in the providers. How the 'revolutionaries' could have prevented their eclipse is not explained.

 "Those who put their faith in the West, or in the militias funded by the Gulf kingdoms that eclipsed the lightly armed revolutionaries, discovered that their interests were not those of the revolution."

 There was no threat of a Western invasion, it was a hoax to stop us caring about Assad's chemical attacks. Yes the American government doesn't seem to want to help, but rejecting any pressure on them to provide aid, and to pretend that Syrians are better off with no help at all, is ridiculous abstentionism.

 "Every threat of Western intervention weakened the revolution further. Imperialism had little to gain from the revolution, and despite the talk of “intervention and aid” was always hostile to the uprising."

 Or: the battle against ISIS has helped regain the anti-jihadi soul of the uprising, and those Saudi-funded forces have a shit load more popular support than wailing that nothing can be done will ever have.

 "The war in Syria has becomes a many-headed conflict. In the north the battle with Iraqi dominated Al Qaida organisations has drained the resistance. In the south Saudi funded forces have made some battlefield gains, but not enough to lift the sieges on the capital’s working class districts, and with little hope of receiving genuine popular backing."

 So you back the struggle within the rebel forces against extremism. No? More wailing then.

 "The rise of the Islamists terrified the Christian and Druze minorities and reinforced sectarian fears among Allawis and Shia Muslims. They had little interest in defending the regime but much to fear from the Salafis who began to dominate the rebel forces."

 He's more negative than the BBC, who at least acknowledge the advances made by rebels in the North. Simon might find it difficult to explain if any of the anti-tank weapons provided by the US recently do make a difference.

 'The defeat of Homs follows the fall of a number of rebel towns and neighbourhoods, and the annihilation of many more. Homs has become a symbol of the retreat of the revolutionary forces.
Although in many areas the war has become a stalemate, Assad is “winning by inches”.'

 If Assad can't win, what can happen. Simon is at a loss.

 "Assad’s victories are hollow. He rules over a rump sectarian statelet at war with the majority of his population, and with little real prospect of reconquering the rest of Syria."

 The comment that offering more to the Kurds would have been a good idea is about the only thing in this piece which adds to the debate at all.

 "The revolutionaries weakened their hand by dismissing the desire of Syria’s Kurdish minority for self rule."