Also you can read my new article, Is Libya An Islamist State?
By Barry Rubin
I’ve warned that the Obama Administration, through the Islamist Turkish government, has produced a majority Islamist leadership. Let me emphasize this point: the Syrian people didn’t choose this exile leadership, the American president and his colleagues did. And in my articles I warned that support would soon pour in from Westerners who had no idea they were promoting a ftuture anti-American Islamist Syria
It is vital to understand that Syria is different from Libya, Tunisia and Egypt. A revolutionary Islamist regime is not inevitable. There are plenty of moderates and those non-Muslims or non-Arabs loyal first and foremost to their own community (Druze, Christians, Kurds, tribes, and even potentially Alawites) who don’t want Islamism. That’s why this disaster is avoidable and all the more strategic sin on the Obama Administration for making an unnecessary catastrophe more likely.
In historical terms, it would be as if the Western powers helped create and back a Communist-dominated opposition council in pre-revolutionary Russia even though the Bolsheviks weren’t in the majority.
Sure enough, along comes Senator John McCain, straight from his foolishly blind unnuanced endorsement and whitewashing of the new Libyan regime, and what does he do? At a World Economic Forum meeting in Amman, October 23, the senator suggested that now that the Libyan crisis is solved (!):
“There will be renewed focus on what practical military operations might be considered to protect civilian lives in Syria.” This would be in response to Syria’s opposition reaching out “for some foreign military intervention.” And who is guiding McCain’s thinking?“We are listening to and engaging with the national opposition council.”
In other words, the senior Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is advocating that U.S. policy follow the advice of an Islamist-dominated group in order to have the U.S. military install what would amount to an Islamist-dominated leadership in Syria.
Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Syria, Turkey, and Lebanon? Perhaps they’re going for a matched set! The fact that our last remaining moderate hope in terms of regimes is Saudi Arabia–and I’m not joking–tells you something about the current situation.
Does this make McCain a secret Muslim or closet Marxist bent on destroying America? No, it just makes him a dangerously ignorant war hero senator. His counterpart–Senator John Kerry, the long-time devotee of the Syrian dictatorship (though in his case perhaps I should put the phrase war hero in quotation marks?) might be the next secretary of state. Of course, Kerry belatedly switched sides to oppose his old friend Bashar al-Asad, without acknowledging that he was ever wrong to back that dictator previously.
In saying this, I’m not advocating either doing or not doing some military intervention in Syria. But any help should not go to the benefit of the Islamist radicals. Is it really too unreasonable to ask the U.S. government to help moderates and oppose revolutionary Islamists, radical nationalists, and extreme leftists?
Here is the view of the current situation of Ammar Abdulhamid, the best analyst of the revolt in Syria, in his October 23 Syria Revolution Digest:
“The hypocrisy of it all is too glaring. Homs City is being bombed to smithereens under our very eyes, and the world that was willing to bleed in pain for a Benghazi that has not yet been attacked is admonishing patience and dialog, as attempts at self-defense by locals get depicted as morally compromising….
“If [the West is] worried about the alternative to the Assad regime, I say, what could be worse than having the country dragged into a civil mayhem, per the plan and will of the Assads?
“The bravery and foolhardiness of the protesters in Homs, Idlib, Deraa and across the country, should not fool anyone, the protesters are desperate and they are hurting. All can still be lost because no one is doing anything to help our brave people. And those we trusted to provide the needed leadership are failing the test in every way. If the world is not responding to our plight the way we need it to respond, this is in no small measure related to the failure of opposition leaders, to their inability to rise above their personal narcissisms and their ideological hang-ups….Our people more than want international protection: they need it, and are desperate for it….”
To me, he’s starting to sound like those radio broadcasters in 1944 Warsaw, 1956 Budapest, and 1968 Prague as the tanks of the repressive dictatorship close in.
But here is his very important analysis of the Transitional National Council, in response to my writing and the questions of others, on October 27:
“Indeed, the Muslim Brotherhood, especially the Aleppo Branch still loyal to former leader Sadreddine Bayanouni, has a lot of influence over the SNC from behind the scenes. In this, the MB doesn’t just rely on its formal representatives, but also on allegedly independent Islamist figures, few Leftist sympathizers and former members, excommunicated for one reason or another, who went on to join other coalitions, such as the Damascus Declaration Council, among others. This arrangement allows the MB to exert influence while maintaining a low formal profile. As such, the official seats reserved for the MB seem reasonable, but through this wider network, their influence is enormous.
“Of course, they still have to forge alliances outside this network, hence the ability of Burhane Ghalioun and others to maneuver and dictate some terms. The exclusion of certain figures like Haitham Al-Maleh, Abdurrazzak Eid from the closed selection process that led to the formation of the SNC seems more related to their unwillingness to play ball in this game. Private arrangements and deals are part of the political process, but when the entire process is based on these kinds of arrangements, it becomes problematic and open to hidden agendas. This is the essence of my criticism of the SNC.
“The thing is there was really no moral or technical justification for the way the SNC was put together. The previous attempts at council formation in Antalya and elsewhere were criticized for insufficient transparency and inclusiveness, but the process of forming the SNC was the least transparent and inclusive of all. “
And who created this leadership? The Turkish regime with U.S. backing!
It’s not news that John McCain is an idiot.
Many of the mainstream Republicans are as ignorant as Democrats.
Someone should take out a full page ad in the Washington Post to get this message across. To think that our highly paid policymakers don’t act upon this advice (or at least read and consider it) borders on the outrageous.
What’s ironic is that if this stupid policy ends up working, the Syrian people will actually have a justified grievance against America for imposing a religious-fascist regime upon them. Recall that some keep bringing up America’s coup against Iran in the 1950s to keep the Communist-sympathizer out as the “blowback” theory. Well, if “blowback” has any credence, then now is the time not to make another awful mistake.
P.S. If Israel ends up getting pincered by an Islamist Egypt and Syria, say goodbye forever to the disproven “land for peace” formula. Not even the weed smokers in Tel Aviv will agree to it. What will the MUGgers do without their sacred formula?
Support for a 2-state solution seems to be rapidly eroding.
Now I understand much better why Likudniks sabotaged the peace deal with Syria whereby Syria would get Golan back in return for peace. There actually is a better deal: Israel keeps Golan in return for support for Assad. I would not be surprised if he starting a detente with the Islamic Republic of Iran provided Iran gets more cozy to Israel and PKK.
Stop blaming mythical “Likudniks”. You’d be surprised how many non-Likud voters voting Center and Left don’t want to leave the Golan without a good deal nor capitulate to her adversaries on other fronts.
If you knew anything about Israeli politics, you’d know that there were negotiations over the Golan by Labor governments headed by Rabin, Peres, and Barak and they didn’t end in any agreements. Also, look up Kahalani’s “Third Way” party and you’ll see that some Laborites were for the Oslo Accords and against a withdrawal from the Golan.
One more thing: Imagine that Israel signed a deal with Assad Sr. twelve years ago and left the Golan. If the revolution succeeds, the Syrian people would consider that agreement as illegitimate, similar to how most Egyptians view the Camp David Accords today. Israel would be left hanging to dry in the wind without strategic territory and with “peace”. Overall, it’s obvious that Israel dodged a bullet.
Is your new formula “Land for NO Peace”? Israel ain’t buying that one.
That has been the formula for quite some time now. I don’t believe that aaaaaall Western leaders are that stupid as to not notice the Arabs don’t offer us peace. I can believe some are that ignorant or that ideologically conditioned or that enslaved to a dominant paradigm, but 100% of them? Nobody notices? If they were that stupid they wouldn’t be able to run their own countries. I can believe that the Scandinavian politicians, living in a bowl of pudding for so long, have their brains degenerated to the point they can hardly lift an eyebrow, but do you really believe someone like Vladimir Putin is a naive romantic fool who just doesn’t get it? Neither are the British or the French. In 1948 the Brits were willing to have all the people in Israel massacred just to retain some air bases and military presence in Arab countries. Do you think they’ve changed much or that others are radically different? It’s simply that their interest is good relations with the Arabs and for that they need to blame us, condemn us and pressure us to withdraw, no matter what the cost to us. Do you think they cared about what happens to Czechoslovakia after they’d give the Sudetenland to Hitler? Did they care if Hitler will be satisfied with what he got or go on to conquer the entire Czechoslovakia? No, they just wanted to appease him. The same is happening today with us. It’s not that they believe or don’t believe that our concessions will lead to peace, but that they simply don’t care. All the talk about peace is just lip service. The reality is that indeed we’re demanded to give land for NO peace.
The Russians for historical reasons are set against having a NATO country intervene in Syria. Its not that they love the Assad regime, its that giving NATO a free hand on Russia’s underbelly is too much for Moscow to tolerate. That is why its protecting the Assad regime. The Russians don’t want to lose their influence in the Middle East.
A prolonged Syrian insurgency/civil war based in Turkey is one likely outcome. This will play right into Turkish hands. As the situation escalates they will have an excuse for land invasion to “stabilize” and ease the “humanitarian crisis”, just as the Syrians did in Lebanon.
What worries me about this is that Erodogan will then have a land bridge to the big prize – Israel.
I think Erodogan is more an egotist driven by emotion and drunk with power than he is a shrewd manipulator. However he wants Cyprus and because he feels he was insulted (insulting him is a crime in Turkey) he wants to get even with the Israelis.
Israel should never give up the Golan for any reason. In the near future it may once again save the entire nation.
He used to be a shrewd manipulator, but he doesn’t seem like that for some time now. The Turks seem to be losing proportions and really starting to believe in Ottoman revival. Oh, and the crisis with Israel isn’t a result of him being insulted. The relations started to gradually deteriorate long before that and I believe it was in their plans. When there’s a conflict between Muslims and Jews Islamists can’t be friends with the Jews. Certainly not when it’s about land that was once conquered by Muslims since according to Sharia law every land the Muslims ever conquered by force belongs to all next generations of Muslims until Judegement Day. And if their ambition is to become leaders of the Muslim world you can’t do that if you’re an ally of Israel. The best way to unite the Muslim world behind you is to become the most vociferous opponent of Israel.
But any of our allies who change sides or otherwise backstab us should take into account that if they leave us no alternative we can change sides too and become as useful to their rivals and enemies as we were to them. Our allies think we’re expendable, and really Turkey will get along just fine without our drones or intelligence. The real catch is that their enemies might get our technologies, intelligence, training and other forms of support instead.
Hope you won’t be too angry about the OT, but there have been several rocket attacks on south Israel in recent hours. There are wounded and serious damage to property. I’m sure if anyone gets hurt in the IDF counter-attck on the rocket launchers you will hear about it in the news.
And in other news prince Khaled Bin Talal of Saudi Arabia offered a million dollar to anyone who will kidnap an Israeli soldier. No blood for oil, as they say.
“Does this make McCain a secret Muslim or closet Marxist bent on destroying America? No, it just makes him a dangerously ignorant war hero senator.”
And I suppose this proves Obama isn’t a neo-Marxist either. If one person (McCain) acts out of sheer ignorance that proves everyone else is acting only out of ignorance with no ideology involved? That makes so much sense…
Do you seriously believe Obama wasn’t influenced even one little bit by neo-Marxist ideas in spite of being surrounded by far leftists much of his life? Is Obama a classical liberal? You described him as radical yourself – a radical what? Radical rightist? Radical capitalist? Radical Christian? Radical Muslim? You yourself indentified far leftist notions in ideas Obama expressed in his writing and elsewhere, except you don’t call them neo-Marxist ideas even if they are neo-Marxist. He might not be a full blown Marxist in the economic sense, but I’m sure he’s quite close to cultural Marxism, and he’s closer to socialism than any American president before him. There’s nothing unusual about it either since cultural Marxism is the dominant ideology in Western academia and a lot of it was mainstreamed in recent decades. Where do multi-culturalism and political correctness come from? Thin air? Cultural Marxist ideas are particularly absorbed by minorities, from racial to religious to queer minorities, since they are particularly relevant to them. So Obama was and is surronded by far leftists much of his life, praised figures such as Saul Alinsky and Jeremiah Wright as mentors, expressed various far leftist notions and tidbits left and right, you describe him as radical yourself, yet it’s ridiculously insane to describe him as neo-Marxist and anyone who does so should be dismissed offhand and ridiculed. Whatever.
And at least I never said he is bent on destroying America. The far leftists see the US as an evil empire, exploiting the Third World (who came to largely replace the proletariat as the oppressed class in the neo-Marxist worldview) and trying to dominate the world through economic and cultural “imperialism-colonialism” and through military endeavors. They don’t want to destroy the US, they just want to end capitalism and what they see as American imperialism and racism. There’s variety and range in their camp. They’re not necessarily all Bolsheviks… (Bolshevism is a bit outdated and only a few are hardcore communists). At best they want the US to become like a small and not too influential Scandinavian social-democracy, but that might be a bit too right wing for others.
What would a neo-Marxist American president look like? Most likely he will disguise himself as a moderate and centrist to get elected. He will gradually introduce more and more legislation that will gradually take the US in a more socialist direction. He would try to gradually change the American direction in international affairs as well. He would not like the US to be more influential, but less influential and more modest. He wouldn’t like figures like Winston Churchill because of their colonialist context, so if there’s a Churchill bust in the Oval Office he might get rid of it as quickly as possible. Since he perceives the US as an aggressive racist empire and wants to change its direction he might go around apologizing for its past sins. His first phone call as president won’t be to one of the US’ long term Western allies, but to one of its Third World “victims” that justifiably hate it in his view and should be appeased. He will see long term Western allies as accomplices in crime and therefore not deserving the same respect as enemies, particularly Third World enemies, who are justifiably angry victims that should be appeased if there ever to be peace, and should be empowered if there’s ever to be justice. He won’t see revolutionary Islamists as religiously motivated, but as Third World Have-Nots revolting against the Haves, both in their own national context (revolting against dictators and the upper class) and in international context (revolting against the West), particularly if they’re revolting against a dictator that is friendly to the US and his country gets American aid in return because this is an aspect of American “imperialism”. But even suspecting that might have anything at all to do with Obama is crazy, an absolutely ludicrous “conspiray theory”, and can only occur to the clinically insane because rational people know that this is absolutely impossible even though the far left took over the universities and is educating generations of Americans on neo-Marxist ideas, but hey, who listens to them? Certainly not their students, right?
Whats up, At the outset I would like to say thanks to you for your current work in composing the content. This served me profoundly, and many issues became clean to me. Particularly those listed in that blog post -> http://staging.pajamasmedia.com/barryrubin/2011/10/28/senator-john-mccain-ignorantly-backs-islamist-dominated-syrian-opposition-leaders. Will place a url on my Fb – link possibly will give the title: 301 Moved Permanently that my pals curious it. I possess many mates who are fascinated in Websites and all the things related with it. Seriously, that was a great article Cya