Tuesday, April 9, 2013

Syria: The Search for the Least Bad Option by (ZIONAZI-NATO AGENT)Anthony H. Cordesman. Center for Strategic and International Studies
“Syria is yet another warning that it is a fantasy to assume that the fall of an authoritarian rule that involves massive economic and political inequalities in nations with deep ethnic, sectarian, and tribal divisions will somehow lead to stable democratic rule and economic development,” says a leading analyst. “There are no good options in Syria,” writes Anthony H. Cordesman, Burke Chair in Strategy, at the Center for Strategic and International Studies: Efforts to unify the opposition and give it moderate leadership are certainly necessary, but no one should have illusions about the probable result. Decades of dictatorship, cronyism, and corruption ensure that today’s Syrian opposition has no real practical background in politics, governance, and democracy. It has democratic voices, but these voices have no unity or power in a structure in which combat capability has become the real metric of status and success. [[[[[[Opposition to Assad is the only real element of unity, as factions emerge that range from Sunni Islamist extremists to minor warlords to leaders with the public image of leadership and command, but no real following. ]]]]]]] “It is easy to talk about unifying the opposition, human rights, democracy, and the rule of law,” notes Cordesman. “There are many Syrians who want this to happen. In practice, however, the odds strongly favor years of instability and power struggles compounded by social fragmentation, widespread conflict, a crippled economy, and outside interference.” Present “Least Bad” Option Can’t Succeed [[[[[[[[[“This confronts the US with having to choose between “bad options” in finding better alternatives. The US can only vaguely hope to shape or influence the post-Assad outcome over time. There is no predictable ‘end stage,’ and US leverage will be limited regardless of the level of intervention it supports,”]]]]]]]]]]]] the CSIS report contends: [[[[[[[[[[This partially justifies the current US emphasis on working with the Arab Gulf states, Jordan, and Turkey, while aiding Israel in building up its ability to deal with Hezbollah and Iranian proxy attacks]]]]]]]]. As the New York Times and Washington Post have now made clear, the US is indirectly providing arms, training, and intelligence support as well as trying to create a more moderate opposition by supporting a “unified” opposition “government,” favoring the more moderate opposition forces, and working with its Arab allies and Turkey to limit the flow of arms and money to the more extreme Sunni Islamist factions. In spite of press reports, the US preserves a kind of “plausible deniability” in the process.The US is also creating a cadre within the State Department that can help the more moderate opposition elements learn how to act as responsible political parties, hold elections, govern, and move toward economic reform and development. The Obama Administration is at least trying to cope with the reality that all forms of major counter-terrorism, counter-insurgency, and [[[[[[[[[[[civil conflict do in fact involve “nation building” – and must find ways of helping to shape the future of Syria that do not involve the mindless waste and lack of planning and preparation that took place in Afghanistan and Iraq.]]]]]]]]But, the current US effort clearly cannot guarantee any rapid end to the worst of the fighting or an end to the Assad regime on a timely basis. The “Best” Other “Least Bad” Option: Giving Opposition More Advanced WeaponsThe “quickest and least attributable” means of securing a more rapid end to the regime would be to supply manportable surface-to-air missiles and guided weapons to “the most moderate elements of the opposition forces,” Cordesman writes: The real issue is the incremental risk in the bad option of using such systems to help the “better” elements of the opposition win versus having the “bad” elements of the opposition takeover without such support. It is not clear that the Obama Administration has really thought this balance of risks out. It effectively means the US may be less damned if it does than if it doesn’t. Preparing for Grim Reality of “Arab Decade” and Broader Clash within Islam Much of the Middle East and North Africa may muddle through the mix of political, economic, factional, demographic, and religious pressures that now threaten the stability of every regional state. However, it seems likely that at least one Middle Eastern state will be in the process of major political upheavals and often internal violence throughout this period. Syria now symbolizes the growing level of violence in the broader struggle for the future of Islam that has become an all too real “clash within a civilization”. If Iraq and Afghanistan were not enough, Syria is yet another warning that it is a fantasy to assume that the fall of an authoritarian rule that involves massive economic and political inequalities in nations with deep ethnic, sectarian, and tribal divisions will somehow lead to stable democratic rule and economic development,” the report concludes: Factions that fight their way to power violently and with a conspiratorial background with no practical experience in politics, no real unity, and no experience in governance and economics can at best be influenced by patient diplomatic efforts at nation building. Many will turn politics into a blood sport for at least several years after an authoritarian regime falls. These movements are scarcely the reformers that can bring the “end of history”, and the US will face a world of “least bad” options that will exist long after Assad finally falls.
[ed note:admitting the western backed(thru proxies in gcc) destabilization of Syria is yet another imperial racket for western ''nation building'',such as Iraq and Afghanistan,he still advocates sending these fanatics and external funded armed groups ''more advanced weapons'' backround of the israhelli agent cordesman who wrote the report...(hes also a NATO agent')... CSIS,Cordesman (THE NATO PUPPET) AND SYRIA ...''GIVE COVERT OPERATORS NEW RANGE OF TOOLS IN SYRIA''

A Technological Fix for Safely Arming Syria's Rebels By Anthony Cordesman

No comments: