Syrian rebels set sights on ‘liberating’ capital

[FarCenter]

DAMASCUS/PARIS: Rebels declared that the campaign to “liberate” Damascus has begun as heavy fighting raged across the city Tuesday and Russia said an agreement is possible for a U.N. resolution on the Syria crisis.

The proclamation by the Free Syrian Army, which also claimed it had shot down a helicopter in the capital, came as peace envoy Kofi Annan said the 16-month crisis increasingly described as a civil war was at a “critical time.”

Heavy machine-gun fire was reported in Damascus’ Sabaa Bahrat Square, where President Bashar Assad’s regime has staged rallies to counter anti-regime protests that erupted in March 2011.

At least eight people were killed as tanks and helicopter gunships were deployed in Qaboon district, while battles were fought in Al-Midan and Al-Hajar Al-Aswad, said the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.

As the fighting inched closer to the regime’s nerve center, FSA spokesman Colonel Kassem Saadeddine said “victory is nigh” and the struggle would go on until the city was conquered.

“We have transferred the battle from Damascus province to the capital. We have a clear plan to control the whole of Damascus. We only have light weapons, but it’s enough.”

Read more: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2012/Jul-18/180978-syrian-rebels-set-sights-on-liberating-capital.ashx

[leveymg]

1. This regime change narrative is getting many months ahead of itself, and may not come to pass.

Syria is not Libya, it's not Iraq, nor is it Lebanon or Iran.

Don't hold your breath.

[FarCenter]

2. It has gone from Arab Springy peaceful regime change to all out civil war

And the outcome is not clear. Either way, heavy casualties are likely.

Syria has about 2/3 the population that the US had in 1860. If you scale the roughly 600,000 dead in the Civil War to Syria, it would be 400,000 dead.

[leveymg]

3. That is exactly why we should be doing everything to disengage ourselves and prevent escalation.

Last edited Wed Jul 18, 2012, 08:43 AM - Edit history (1)

We have leverage over our "friends" in the Friends of Syria to disengage, but haven't. That makes us complicitous in the killing. We've helped to set off a regional religious war.

Imagine the U.S. Civil War with added dimension of a thousand year old Catholic vs Protestant genocidal conflict - that's what we've gotten ourselves into the middle of in Syria.

[FarCenter]

5. It is not clear whether the sectarian war can be confined to Syria

It's reasonably likely that the Shiite-Sunni divide in Iraq and Lebanon would also fracture those countries, with Christians, Druz, etc., simply trying to survive the conflict.

Wild cards are the half of the Alawites living in Turkey and the Kurds living in Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran. If they go for autonomy, Iran could become involved as well.

[leveymg]

6. There is only one clear beneficiary of the conflict. Read

A Clean Break - it isn't the US.

[FarCenter]

8. But ultimately Israel will be surrounded by Sunni theocracies

Saudi Arabia is a Sunni theocracy. The Muslim Brotherhood is gaining in Egypt. Turkey slowly evolves towards an Islamist state.

The key strategic issue is whether the Shia crescent from the Hezbollah in Lebanon, to Alawites in Syria, to Shiites in Iraq and Iran can hold

or

whether Saudi Arabia and Turkey can execute a pincer movement through Syria and Jordan to complete the Sunni ring around Israel.

I would actually bet that at some point Turkey enters northern Syria in order to "protect" the Alawite and Christian etc popoulations of Syria for "humanitarian" reasons. Syria then collapses.

This is followed shortly by a collapse of Jordan, which is essentially a completely isolated anachronism, and the partition of Iraq, with the western Sunni portion becoming part of the new Sunni Islamic Greater Syrian state.

I'm not clear why the US and Israel think that this is a good thing. But so it seems.

[leveymg]

9. Israel reached an accomodation with KSA and Egypt decades ago.

While all the other Sunni countries don't necessarily fall in lock step with the Saudis on all issues, there's no reason to believe that there will be a major change in the status quo re: Israel. Turkey sees this as a prime opportunity to reestablish the old Ottoman era control over much of northern Syria. Right now, everyone's common interest seems to be knocking over Syria, cutting it up, and bending Iran to heel.

Israel's attitude is not to interfere (visibly) while the Arabs and Persians are busy killing each other. The US seems to think -- well, I'm I'm not sure what our strategic thinking seems to be at this point other than keeping the Israelis and Saudis happy, and playing a quiet role of "Pay No Attention to The Man Behind the Curtain." Don't worry, by and large they don't and we give them no reason to.

My gut tells me that's a prescription for a regional Sunni-Shi'ia war that might soon blowback on us, and uncontrollably escalate into a global Hobbesian state of nature of all-against-all. Things can get much worse very quickly.

[FarCenter]

10. It's doubtful that a decades old accommodation will hold going forward

It's only US influence that motivated KSA and Egypt to reach accommodation with Israel.

Since the US became the "sole superpower", the rest of the world has been shifting in attitude towards first passive agressive and then hostile attitudes.

As US power wanes, the ability to keep KSA and Egypt on side with Israel will also wane. Regardless of the structure of government, they have to take into account the attitudes of their populace, which is generally hostile to Israel.

The obvious strategy once Sunni solidarity is achieved in the region around Israel is to isolate Israel, including Gaza and the West Bank as sort of a "cyst" of European intrusion into the Middle East. As time goes by, the encysted Jewish and Arab population will come into more and more conflict, to the disgust of the rest of the world.

A Sunni-Shiite war, in effect a replay of the Iran-Iraq war, would be much to Israel's advantage, since it would ennervate both sides. It's unclear whether Israel can actually manage to start it.

[leveymg]

11. I think we largely agree about the "big picture" for peace and stability in the region.

It isn't good, it's likely to get worse - but, then again it has been doing that for a long time.

[Igel]

4. But the "this is purely defensive" narrative is right on track.

In Libya, bombing checkpoints and laying seige to Tripoli were "defensive" to keep protesters hundreds of miles away safe.

The distressing thing is that the dissociation between description and fact was so glaring.

[leveymg]

7. The dissociation between calling foreign-armed militia "protestors" and fact is glaring.

Keeping the general population "safe" doesn't seem to be anyone's concern, on either side. Hence, neither should be rewarded. If you prosecute one group in a civil war for war crimes, you'll have to go after all of them.