We should intervene in Syria
The situation in Syria is devastating at the moment, thousands are getting killed by the government.
I do not think we need to put boots on the ground like in Iraq, but the No Fly Zone enforcement in Lybia worked very successfully. There appears to be enough domestic pressure in Syria to enact change if they were supported.
Is it not time to take action now in Syria to put a stop to further bloodshed?
A no fly zone doesn't make sense as Assad isn't using air power to kill the protesters. There's also no defensible, rebel-controlled area to support. Lastly, support for Assad is coming from Damascus and Aleppo, which are on the opposite sides of the country, while regime opponents are present in most other areas (especially semi-rural ones). A military operation would have to be a full-frontal assault on Damascus. Such an assault faces two nearly insurmountable hurdles. First, the assault must be carried out by Arabs, because Iran and Russia will make our lives as miserable as possible if it's a Western-led attack (there's also the risk of a nationalist backlash). And second, the Syrian army is pretty damn good. It could easily defeat any half-hearted army the Arabs would throw at it.
I'm also weary of what a Syria with a destroyed Alawite military would look like. I see no circumstance that would prevent large-scale reprisals against the Alawites if that was to occur. Ideally, we'd continue undermining the Syrian economy long enough for key Syrian actors to turn on Assad and replace him with someone more palatable to both the current regime and the opposition. Ultimately, I can't see Assad staying in power for more than another year or two, but I also don't think he'll get overthrown by the rebels.
Hope is the denial of reality
A No Fly Zone is a bit of a misnomer anyway isn't it? I mean all those tanks we destroyed in Lybia weren't flying either.Originally Posted by Loki
I think you will find that Syria is a very different country than Libya. I doubt a no-fly zone would work. If you want to enforce regime change there you will have to put boots on the ground. And those boots probably would be filled by Turkish feet most likely.
Congratulations America
A direct confrontation between the Syrian and Turkish militaries would be a bloodbath. Turkey would likely win (the initial fight anyway), but probably at the price of thousands of lives. I can't see Turkey paying such a price.
Hope is the denial of reality
Not at this time anyway. It's not entirely impossible though. And with a little bit of cooperation with the Israelis (sub rosa of course) Turkey could go a long way.
Congratulations America
The only scenario that might lead to that happening is a splintering of the Syrian military at the top, with part of the military calling in for foreign assistance. As long as the Syrian military remains united behind Assad, there's no chance of a full-scale intervention.
Hope is the denial of reality
Which is the same as saying that as long as they are Alevi they will be united behind Assad.
Congratulations America
I think if the Alawites (not the Turkish Alevis) stop supporting Assad, Assad won't be in power. I suppose it's possible that his relatives can continue supporting him while the rest of the military turns, but I think Assad would be forced from power before that occurs.
Hope is the denial of reality
Alawites = alevis, I just refuse to use the transcription of the arabic term. Otherwise, yes.
Congratulations America
Alevis and Alawites (sometimes called Alawis) are two distinct groups.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alevi#The_name
Hope is the denial of reality
The distinction is whether or not a muslim accepts Ali as the fourth Caliph or not. There may be ethnical distinctions, religious the two groups are the same.
Congratulations America
No, they're not. They have vastly different theologies.
Hope is the denial of reality
Yes, but that was the excuse we used to get the policy through the UN. Coincidentally, it's also the reason we have no shot of doing it again (even if Assad was using airpower).
Hope is the denial of reality
Come on, everyone knew that was going to happen when the resolution went through the UN last time, Putin is not so stupid he was deceived. The caveat was no boots on the ground last time.
Actually, no one expected an operation of this scale. There have been a lot of reports about pissed off diplomats from Russia, China, and South Africa, all saying that they will never be duped like this again (that's why Russia and China are resisting voting for any remotely anti-Syrian resolutions).
Hope is the denial of reality
You seriously think Putin was duped?
Yes, I think he wasn't expecting an intervention of that scale.
Hope is the denial of reality
I think its naive to consider Putin to be stupid. The UN authorising force means what it did. I think Putin knew full well what was going on and accepted it, I think it would have happened as a NATO response had the UN not acted and he probably decided that a UN-led intervention like with the "no boots on the ground" caveat which the UN resolution gave would give him more say than if we'd acted outside the UN through NATO where he'd have had no input whatsoever and we could have landed ground troops for all he knew.
However that doesn't mean that just because he knew what was going on, he and/or his officials can't leak that its not what they wanted safe in the knowledge that saying so plays to domestic audiences while they got the best they could have internationally too.
I don't think that's consistent with the sheer amount of hostility coming from Russia, China, and South Africa, and their complete unwillingness to pass an even slightly negative resolution against Syria. They do feel betrayed. At the very least, they expected NATO to ask for a new mandate once it was clear a no-fly zone wasn't working. Instead, we both ignored the no fly part and the duration part of the resolution. What leverage did these countries end up getting when NATO never went back to the UN to ask for a stronger mandate?
Hope is the denial of reality
I think Rand's last section hits the nail on the head. But this worked only once. Putin can't play that game anymore because after Libya he can't say anymore that he doesn't expect a intervention of that scale when agreeing on a no-fly zone.
"Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt
You're assuming anyone in Russia gave a damn.
Hope is the denial of reality
If they don't, they have no reason for us to not intervene.
The Russian people don't. The foreign policy makers do.
Hope is the denial of reality
They don't care about what's happening in Syria/Libya. They do care if Putin can hold his position against the "west" or not.
"Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt
There is a Russian Naval base in Syria, and the mere presence of Russian ships should discourage any sort of military action. And if not we can at least assist the Syrian military with targeting NATO planes without engaging in direct military action. Obviously after Lybia you are not geting anything through the UN.
It would be a non-issue if Putin didn't comment or said that Libya isn't important to Russian foreign policy.
Hope is the denial of reality
What form do you see this intervention taking and what good do you think it would do?
When the sky above us fell
We descended into hell
Into kingdom come
Go ahead, UK to the rescue. US will cheer you on. And please note how you use the word "we" when you believe it to be something that requires involvment of economies from outside your own country. Funny that. I mean, shouldn't we save Europe?
Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?
Why should usage of the plural "we" be surprising? Get a dictionary.
Given how many operations the US and the UK have been jointly involved in, it should be even less surprising.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote