Obama Cutting Funds for Syrian Rebels

The headline covers most everything you need to know, but here’s more:

From afar, the U.S.-approved and partially American-armed Syrian “opposition” seems to be a single large, if rather amorphous, organization. But in fact it’s a collection of “brigades” of varying sizes and potentially shifting loyalties that have grown up around local leaders, or, if you will, local warlords. And while Washington talks about the Syrian “opposition” in general terms, the critical question for the fighters in the field and those supporting them is, “opposition to whom?” To Syrian President Assad? To the so-called Islamic State, widely known as ISIS or ISIL? To the al Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al Nusra?

That lack of clarity is crippling the whole effort, not least because of profound suspicions among rebel groups that Washington is ready to cut some sort of deal with Assad in the short or medium term if, indeed, it has not done so already. For Washington, the concern is that the forces it supports are ineffectual, or corrupt, or will defect to ISIS or Nusra—or all of the above.

Giving money to Syrian rebel moderates is like buying jewelry at Target — there’s a pretty low ceiling on how much you can spend.

Of course, that’s only part of the reason. The other is, now that we’re Assad’s effective guarantors, Obama has little interest in his overthrow. assuming Obama ever had any interest in doing so.

Meanwhile, Tehran’s mullahs smile once more.