Assad Assaults Rebel ‘Free Zones’
In both Homs and Idleb, the Free Syrian Army has avoided heroic last stands in urban areas. Rather, the bulk of the fighters leave before the army makes its final assault. This has the unfortunate side-effect of leaving the civilian population more or less defenseless when the army and the “Shabiha” Alawi paramilitaries enter, but it reflects sensible guerrilla strategy. The FSA is aware that it cannot hope to prevail against Assad’s forces in a straight, head-on clash. It thus prefers to conserve its resources, and to harass the army and the Shabiha in the countryside.
What all this adds up to is prolonged civil war. Since the “international community” appears to be indifferent to the fate of the people of Syria, no early resolution of the crisis can be expected. The rebellion still lacks a coherent strategy for toppling the Assad regime, and is too weak to do so without external aid. But the counter-revolution now under way also shows that the regime lacks any clear plan.
The Assad regime entirely lacks legitimacy, at least outside of the Alawi population of Syria which constitutes 12% of the total. This means that the only tool available to it is force. So when force appears not to deliver the desired results, its only recourse is to apply more force. And it isn’t working. In Homs and Idleb provinces, the FSA has survived the government onslaught and is operating in the countryside. In Latakia, Aleppo, Hama, Hassakeh, Qamishli, and Damascus itself, demonstrations are continuing.
A formidable international coalition is currently assembled behind the Assad regime. It consists of Russia, Iran, China, and Hizballah. The rebels, meanwhile, currently have only Kofi Annan. In spite of this, and in spite of the massacres and the bloody repression, the uprising against the Syrian dictatorship is holding on. The counter-revolution now under way will not succeed in putting out the fire.
But the ultimate outcome depends largely on whether the West will come to the rebels’ aid or abandon the Syrian people to their fate.
Yeah, we really ought to jump, feet first, into a Syrian quagmire, since our meddling in other Middle Eastern countries has gone SO well! Who, exactly, would we be supporting there, anyway? The Muslim Brotherhood? Al Qaeda? We’ve seen this movie before.
I think that you may be overestimating the staying power of the FSA. The FSA running away from Assad’s forces, and leaving the civilian population to be slaughtered will, most likely, cost the FSA whatever support it may have with the Syrian people, a heroic last stand defending the people of Homs could’ve won the hearts and minds of the Syrian people. I strongly suspect that Assad will have this business more or less wrapped up within the next couple of months, he’s clearly done playing games.
Also, as you said, Assad has the support of Russia, Iran, China, and Hizballah. Syria is NOT Libya. Russia and China were very unhappy about the Libyan operation, so a replay of that action is very unlikely. Unlike Libya, both Iran and Russia have signifigant national interests on the line in Syria. Is Syria really worth running the risk of a military confrontation with Iran? With China? With Russia? The wisest course of action for the west is to stay out of the mess in Syria.
I would not like to be in Assad’s shoes right now … his WTF??!! moment will arrive shortly; but as arrogant richardcraniums tend to be … they think they’re invincible. There’s no place for this guy to run.
If Saudi Arabia hosted Hajj Idi Amin Dada, after his racism and genocide, what makes you think Assad won’t have some nice villa to retire to?
“Since the “international community” appears to be indifferent to the fate of the people of Syria, no early resolution of the crisis can be expected.”
Obama and “friends” in NATO were ever so eager to pound Libya into dust and dive headlong into that Civil War. Now they are very, very, silent. Why is that? Could it be that Libya had oil and was easy to crush, but Syria has no oil and therefore no up side to attacking it? Also, Syria is much more heavily armed than Libya and has a huge stockpile of chemical and biological weapons. These weapons could easily be used against anyone trying to attack Syria, either directly (as in the case of Israel) or indirectly against the west (through terrorism and terrorist groups like al Qaeda). So now NATO and the Europeans think that Syria is just not worth the trouble of invading. It’s the type of diplomatic hypocrisy that tends to make you ill. So the Syrian rebels are on their own, no matter how much killing Assad and his Iranian helpers put into crushing this uprising.
But, don’t forget, this is the Middle East. Memories are long in this part of the world and nobody is ever forgiven for anything. Assad may crush most of the rebellion, but he will never crush the rebels. Too many people have been murdered by Assad for anyone to forgive him of anything. There may be a pause in the fighting, but from now on the war will never end until Assad is killed. There may yet be hope for the world.
But, not to worry. Obama would go into Syria in a second if NATO or the UN allow him to. After all, he doesn’t need any approval of Congress anymore to go to war. He didn’t need it in Libya, remember?
Jonathan Spyer, are you blind or just another tool for US interventions in no-win ME Civil Wars. The ‘Arab Spring’ is a fraud and has been nothing but a cover for the spread of Islam! Wake up, we have no business intervening in Syria just as we had none to intervene in Libya or Yugoslavia. Why have you ignored the disaster that is playing out in Afghanistan and Iraq…Wake up!!!
I’ve heard that all the Middle Eastern countries have a very apt word for describing when their governments oppress and kill their own people, when ‘rebels’ fight and kill their own people, when the strongman du jour throws his weight around…
I think they call it a ‘weekday’.
Not getting involved in this sandbox slap-fight is one of the only good things Obama has done done in his entire career.
Why are complacent Americans so intersted in bringing war and destruction to other parts of the world. The American can never get enough violence and misery to satisfy his feeling of being a wonderful human being. A hundred years ago after three gut wrenching years of warfare the European war was almost at an end; both Germany and the allies were bled near to death and were seeking any kind of an armistice; along came war mongering Woodrow Wilson and his inane crusade to make the world safe for democracy; result two more years of brutal warfare and millions of casualities and in the end it did not make a difference but only made things worse. If these Americans like Wilson and his modern imitators want war let them go over and do the killing and dying but no they always manage to find more naive and young bodies to throw into the meat grinders of the war machine. Decent people want no part of these stupid wars; send that message to Obama, McCane et al.
Idiot.
Germany sought an alliance with Mexico to attack us, and all along German subs preyed upon our shipping. At least get your facts in order.
As for Syria, I’m definitely for sitting on the sidelines and having another beer.
While Johann’s summary is a bit simplistic, it is far closer to reality than the BS we feed the kids in public school about WWI. It would have been far better had we stayed out of it in EVERY… SINGLE… WAY. Wilson was a fool for taking sides.
His dicking around in affairs that did not concern us is one of the reasons for the advent of WWII.
“sought an alliance with Mexico to attack us, and all along German subs preyed upon our shipping.”
- yes, because, you know, America was TOTALLY minding its own business and not getting involved or taking sides or anything, so the Germans just decided to up and attack our shipping to England and the allied nations for no reason at all.
You are the one who needs to get his facts straight. Your narrative makes no sense.
And why is it “unlikely to succeed” this time? Syria isn’t Libya. Assad has powerful allies. He is simply following the blueprint his father drew. It works.
Assad should make peace with Israel, right now. He should dump the Iranians, and allow the Israelis to use his airspace to destroy the Iranian nuclear facilities. With Israeli support, even covert, he could maintain control over his country, and everybody would be better off.
…uuh, yea, right. While it sounds like a good solution, ain’t never gonna happen; there is too much hatred for the Jews, even to stay in power.
The Saudis are reportedly sending arms to the rebels; that tells you right there there is no one to support and the region is screwed no matter which side wins.
I don’t understand the opposition the aiding te rebellion in Syria. In Iraq the US only intervened after Saddam slaughtered any potential allies. How did that work out? This one does have WMD, you may find yourself forced to send soldiers in a couple of years while air support would suffice today.
I understand, in the worst case there will be an Islamic regime which just like the current Syria will be an enemy. So what? It wont be an ally of Iran, thats something. Plus for very little effort there is a chance a new Syrian regime will be thankful for the aid it receives.
Just think what a world we are living in when we help people dispose of dictators who are our allies while we refuse to help people topple dictators who are our enemies. If you keep on rewarding enemies and punishing friends, don’t be surprised if one day you wake up without any friends.
Well except for Israel of course, the poor suckers.