6 May

U.S. Syrian Policy: A Disgrace in the Making

Another monitoring mission, another set of people from all over the world making excuses, trying to explain the unexplainable and getting frustrated and fired upon to boot. When will the world follow a plan that makes sense. To the world we say: Give us what we need to get the mission accomplished, not what you need to feel good about yourselves.” –Syrian Revolution Digest, April 21, 2012 

U.S. policy toward Syria is turning into a scandal on both strategic and humanitarian grounds. The next three months will be wasted in a toothless observer effort during which time the Syrian regime will go on massacring people and mopping up the rebellion. In addition, U.S. policymakers admit that they have no real back-up policy and what they should do next.

And then to show how ridiculous the whole thing is, Syrian troops opened fire at oppositionists trying to talk to the UN monitors, forcing the observers to flee for their lives and injuring eight demonstrators. The UN responds by proposing a few dozen more, equally helpless, observers.

This is the same UN that in 2006 promised Israel that it would intercept Syrian weapons being smuggled to Hizballah in Lebanon and stop that radical group from reoccupying its pre-war positions in the south of the country. In six years, not a single weapon has been intercepted and not a single Hizballah terrorist stopped. On the contrary, with Syrian backing, Hizballah has terrorized the thousands of soldiers in the UN forces in Lebanon.

There should be no question as to what should be done. Along with Iran, North Korea, and Cuba, the Syrian regime is the most anti-American government in the world. It has done everything possible to sabotage U.S. interests, to sponsor terrorism, and to block peace. That regime is also Iran’s main ally.

Any conceivable president who cared about or understood U.S. interests would make the overthrow of the Syrian regime a top priority for the United States. I’m not talking about sending troops or going to war but about every conceivable other means. This should be blindingly obvious.

In addition, any competent president would work hard to help the moderate pro-democratic forces in the Syrian opposition so that they can gain power in the country. Instead, the Obama Administration that subcontracted dealing with the Syrian regime to the UN has subcontracted dealing with the Syrian opposition to the Islamist regime in Turkey. Not surprisingly, the Turkish regime has pushed Muslim Brothers and other Islamists and their clients into the “official” leadership of the Syrian opposition, the Syrian National Council. This has led to a fracturing of opposition leadership. 

And the Syrian regime is being rewarded with no more pressure and being given the ability to stall for time even though it has already violated the ceasefire. This is not merely a bad U.S. and Western policy; it is the worst possible policy, lacking any strategy to undermine the radicals and help the moderates.

After 2.5 years of the Obama Administration treating this enemy as a friend we have seen almost a year of dithering over the opportunity to get rid of that regime. It is like when the administration ignored the stealing of the election in Iran and the opposition movement there, as if it wanted to coddle, not confound, the Tehran regime. It also came to the rescue of the Hamas regime in the Gaza Strip, pressing Israel to minimize sanctions.

In contrast, the administration has not hesitated to overthrow an ally in Egypt and come close to doing that in Bahrain.

The pattern is that the radical side breaks every agreement, rejects compromise, and escalates aggression and the Obama Administration takes it all with a smile on its face and a song in its heart.

Read more

       

About Curt

Curt served in the Marine Corps for four years and has been a law enforcement officer in Los Angeles for the last 20 years.

5 Responses to U.S. Syrian Policy: A Disgrace in the Making

  1. Ditto says: 1

    The international community (Including the Obama administration’s) lackluster response to these atrocities are downright despicable.

    ReplyReply
  2. Greg says: 2

    This sounds like a replay of the right’s reaction to Libya. First Obama was lambasted when it seemed he intended to do nothing, and then the same people turned on a dime and lambasted him when something was done. I recall Gingrich in particular, reversing his position so abruptly that anyone watching him might have gotten whiplash.

    This is another dangerous situation for those wanting to make hay over Obama’s supposed inaction. He might actually be preparing to act, in which case they’d have to either commit highly visible flip-flops again, or be caught supporting Obama policy.

    I suppose they could always howl about anything Obama does as being nothing more than a cynical pre-election stunt.

    ReplyReply
  3. malize says: 3

    @Greg:

    lol…Obama was so busy screwing the pooch with Libya it took the freaking French to deliver the coup de grace to Mr. Q’s regime. You don’t know how they did that? I wouldn’t be surprised.

    As far as Syria, it’s a completely different situation from Libya. The only thing the resistance there has managed to do is die, with no forward momentum…and that’s just the tactical situation on the ground.

    Geopolitically, the situation is also not the same…Syria has strong friends with real serious intentions, from Russia who sits on the UNSC to Iran who doesn’t want to see a client of theirs with key strategic position go away.

    Lightning doesn’t strike twice…Obama got very lucky with Libya, lucky in that our allies wanted that job done and over with more than we did, and for once they acted decisively on their desires.

    ReplyReply
  4. retire05 says: 4

    @Greg:

    My, my Greg, what just difference on short year makes. Why, it was only a short year ago that Hillary Clinton was praising Assad as a “reformer” and assuring the American public that there would be no U.S. intervention in Syria.

    Of course, we know that Obama’s foreign policy when it comes to the Middle East is a total disaster. Remember Egypt, when the Administration, along with a compliant butt kissing press, told us what a wonderful thing the Egyptian riots were (just the young seeking freedom from Mubarak’s oppressive regime) and how James Clapper testified that the Muslim Brotherhood was simply misunderstood and were really a “peaceful” group not interested in taking over Egypt? Well, Greggie, how’s that working out?

    Oh, and yes, Gaddaffi was a bad guy, but a bad guy that hated the Islamists and kept them at bay in his nation. Now, the people with the same religious philosophy as Ayman al Zawahiri, ObL’s successor, are poised to take over Lybia.

    Gotta hand it to Obama. Leading from behind is quite a feat. With any luck at all, by the end of his term, Obama will have done a Carter redeux, only instead of one nation being run by radical Islamists (Iran) most of the Middle East will be. Quite a feat for a guy (Obama) who just sold us out to Pakistan.

    ReplyReply
  5. RWGinger says: 5

    So BO turns to the UN?
    The same UN that is so concerned about people being murdred by islamists that call for the USA to give land back to “Indians”
    On a related note it would not be a surprise if things in the “Arab Spring” countires are turning out exactly as BO and minions wanted

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

 

Switch to our mobile site