Posted on Jun\u00a017,\u00a02013<\/h4>\n\n<\/p>\nBy Eugene Robinson<\/p>\n
WASHINGTON\u2013In Syria, the Obama administration seems to be stumbling back to the future: An old-fashioned proxy war, complete with the usual shadowy CIA arms-running operation, the traditional plan to prop up ostensible \u201cmoderates\u201d whose prospects are doubtful and, of course, the customary shaky grasp of what the fighting is really about.<\/p>\n
This will not end well.<\/p>\n
It is tragic that more than 90,000 people have been killed in the bloody Syrian conflict, with more than a million displaced. But I have heard no claim that President Obama\u2019s decision to arm the rebels will halt or even slow the carnage. To the contrary, sending more weapons into the fray will likely result in greater death and destruction, at least in the short term.<\/p>\n
So this is not promising as a humanitarian intervention. And if the aim is to punish dictator Bashar al-Assad for his apparent use of chemical weapons, surely there are measures\u2013a missile strike on the regime\u2019s military airfields, for example\u2013that would make the point without also making an open-ended commitment.<\/p>\n
Why decide now to announce stepped-up direct support for Gen. Salim Idriss and his rebel forces? It is surely not a coincidence that the Syrian military\u2013with the help of Hezbollah, the Lebanese militia backed by Iran\u2013has been pulverizing the rebels in recent weeks and now threatens to recapture Aleppo, the country\u2019s commercial hub.<\/p>\n
Hence, a complicated proxy war: The United States supports Idriss. Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are U.S. allies, send money and arms to competing rebel factions that dream of turning Syria into an Islamic republic. Russia, Iran and Hezbollah are supporting Assad with weapons, money and\u2013in the case of Hezbollah\u2013well-trained troops. The rebel side is mostly Sunni; the government side largely Shiite.<\/p>\n
As I said, this will not end well.<\/p>\n
President Obama\u2019s reluctance to get dragged into this morass has been commendable, but now his ambivalence and caution become liabilities. Iran\u2019s most important ally in the Arab world is Syria. Russia\u2019s only military base outside of the former Soviet Union is in Syria. Does Obama care as much as those nations\u2019 leaders do about who wins the war? If not, what\u2019s the point?<\/p>\n
It could be argued that providing Idriss with light arms and ammunition is a way to equip moderate, secular forces for their inevitable fight against Islamists in a fractured post-Assad Syria. But this is moot if Assad crushes the rebellion and holds on. Accordingly, U.S. aid reportedly may include some heavier weapons for use against tanks and aircraft. The CIA will take the lead in transferring the arms and training the rebels to use them, according to The Washington Post.<\/p>\n
Perhaps bolstering Idriss can at least buy time for negotiations to produce a political settlement, which is what Obama has said he prefers. For a long time, Russia balked at joining the call for an international peace conference. Now that momentum on the battlefield has shifted and the Assad regime is in a stronger position, Russia is more willing to summon everyone to the table\u2013but the Obama administration is no longer in such a big hurry.<\/p>\n
Not every slope is slippery, but this one looks like a bobsled run. It was August 2011 when Obama issued a statement declaring that \u201cthe time has come for President Assad to step aside.\u201d Now that the president has put muscle behind those words, it will be difficult for the United States to accept any other outcome.<\/p>\n
There will be pressure to impose a no-fly zone to neutralize Assad\u2019s devastating air power. There will be pressure to contain the war so it does not spill beyond Syria\u2019s borders and destabilize our allies in Turkey and Jordan, or our sort-of, kind-of allies in Iraq. There will be pressure to alleviate the immense suffering of the Syrian people. Perhaps all of this can be accomplished without putting American lives at risk. I doubt it.<\/p>\n
Above all, there will be pressure to win a proxy war that Obama never wanted to fight. This is how quagmires begin, with one reluctant step after another toward the yawning abyss. (See: Vietnam.)<\/p>\n
We do sometimes win proxy wars\u2013in Afghanistan, for example, where the CIA helped the warlords defeat the mighty Soviet army. In the process, however, we created the chaotic power vacuum that allowed al-Qaeda to set up shop\u2013and ultimately launch the 9\/11 attacks.<\/p>\n
I hope I\u2019m wrong but fear I\u2019m right: This will not end well.<\/p>\n
Eugene Robinson\u2019s e-mail address is eugenerobinson(at)washpost.com.<\/i><\/p>\n
\u00a9 2013, Washington Post Writers Group<\/small>\n<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.truthdig.com\/images\/eartothegrounduploads\/AP301213436782_copy.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
AP\/SANA<\/p>\n
A general view of damaged shops in Qusair, Syria.\n<\/p>\n
<\/span>\n<\/div>\n
By Eugene Robinson<\/p>\n
WASHINGTON\u2013In Syria, the Obama administration seems to be stumbling back to the future: An old-fashioned proxy war, complete with the usual shadowy CIA arms-running operation, the traditional plan to prop up ostensible \u201cmoderates\u201d whose prospects are doubtful and, of course, the customary shaky grasp of what the fighting is really about.<\/p>\n
This will not end well.<\/p>\n
It is tragic that more than 90,000 people have been killed in the bloody Syrian conflict, with more than a million displaced. But I have heard no claim that President Obama\u2019s decision to arm the rebels will halt or even slow the carnage. To the contrary, sending more weapons into the fray will likely result in greater death and destruction, at least in the short term.<\/p>\n
So this is not promising as a humanitarian intervention. And if the aim is to punish dictator Bashar al-Assad for his apparent use of chemical weapons, surely there are measures\u2013a missile strike on the regime\u2019s military airfields, for example\u2013that would make the point without also making an open-ended commitment.<\/p>\n
Why decide now to announce stepped-up direct support for Gen. Salim Idriss and his rebel forces? It is surely not a coincidence that the Syrian military\u2013with the help of Hezbollah, the Lebanese militia backed by Iran\u2013has been pulverizing the rebels in recent weeks and now threatens to recapture Aleppo, the country\u2019s commercial hub.<\/p>\n
Hence, a complicated proxy war: The United States supports Idriss. Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are U.S. allies, send money and arms to competing rebel factions that dream of turning Syria into an Islamic republic. Russia, Iran and Hezbollah are supporting Assad with weapons, money and\u2013in the case of Hezbollah\u2013well-trained troops. The rebel side is mostly Sunni; the government side largely Shiite.<\/p>\n
As I said, this will not end well.<\/p>\n
President Obama\u2019s reluctance to get dragged into this morass has been commendable, but now his ambivalence and caution become liabilities. Iran\u2019s most important ally in the Arab world is Syria. Russia\u2019s only military base outside of the former Soviet Union is in Syria. Does Obama care as much as those nations\u2019 leaders do about who wins the war? If not, what\u2019s the point?<\/p>\n
It could be argued that providing Idriss with light arms and ammunition is a way to equip moderate, secular forces for their inevitable fight against Islamists in a fractured post-Assad Syria. But this is moot if Assad crushes the rebellion and holds on. Accordingly, U.S. aid reportedly may include some heavier weapons for use against tanks and aircraft. The CIA will take the lead in transferring the arms and training the rebels to use them, according to The Washington Post.<\/p>\n
Perhaps bolstering Idriss can at least buy time for negotiations to produce a political settlement, which is what Obama has said he prefers. For a long time, Russia balked at joining the call for an international peace conference. Now that momentum on the battlefield has shifted and the Assad regime is in a stronger position, Russia is more willing to summon everyone to the table\u2013but the Obama administration is no longer in such a big hurry.<\/p>\n
Not every slope is slippery, but this one looks like a bobsled run. It was August 2011 when Obama issued a statement declaring that \u201cthe time has come for President Assad to step aside.\u201d Now that the president has put muscle behind those words, it will be difficult for the United States to accept any other outcome.<\/p>\n
There will be pressure to impose a no-fly zone to neutralize Assad\u2019s devastating air power. There will be pressure to contain the war so it does not spill beyond Syria\u2019s borders and destabilize our allies in Turkey and Jordan, or our sort-of, kind-of allies in Iraq. There will be pressure to alleviate the immense suffering of the Syrian people. Perhaps all of this can be accomplished without putting American lives at risk. I doubt it.<\/p>\n
Above all, there will be pressure to win a proxy war that Obama never wanted to fight. This is how quagmires begin, with one reluctant step after another toward the yawning abyss. (See: Vietnam.)<\/p>\n
We do sometimes win proxy wars\u2013in Afghanistan, for example, where the CIA helped the warlords defeat the mighty Soviet army. In the process, however, we created the chaotic power vacuum that allowed al-Qaeda to set up shop\u2013and ultimately launch the 9\/11 attacks.<\/p>\n
I hope I\u2019m wrong but fear I\u2019m right: This will not end well.<\/p>\n
Eugene Robinson\u2019s e-mail address is eugenerobinson(at)washpost.com.<\/i><\/p>\n
\u00a9 2013, Washington Post Writers Group<\/small>\n<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
AP\/SANA<\/p>\n
A general view of damaged shops in Qusair, Syria.\n<\/p>\n
<\/span>\n<\/div>\n