29 Mar 2024
Thursday 11 August 2016 - 15:35
Story Code : 226673

Why US needs Iran and Russia to deal with Syrian crisis settlement

US proponents of a bombing campaign against Bashar al-Assad in Syria forget that the settlement will require the positive cooperation of Russia and Iran, CIA veteran Paul Pillar writes, warning against increasing US airstrikes in the region.





Voices continue toemerge inthe US calling fora bombing campaign againstthe Syrian government led byPresident Bashar al-Assad.

In mid-June, 51 US State Department diplomats singed an internal memo urging the Obama administration tocarry outstrikes againstAssad inSyria.

A few days later Michele Flournoy, who is believed tobe most likely Clinton's pick forSecretary ofDefense, called for "limited military coercion" againstDamascus aswell asthe creation of "no bombing zones" inSyria, Defense One reported.
In her response tothe media outlet's publication Flournoy clarified that she argued that "the US should undersome circumstances consider using limited military coercion primarily strikes using standoff weapons toretaliate againstSyrian military targets inorder tostop violations ofthe Cessation ofHostilities."


She added that that those strikes would aim to "deter Russian and Syrian bombing ofinnocent civilians and the opposition groups we [the US] support, and set more favorable conditions onthe ground fora negotiated political settlement."


On July 20, speaking toCBS News' Margaret Brennan Leon Panetta, former Defense Secretary and CIA Director, remarked that he believes that "the next president" is likely toincrease US airstrikes targeting both Daesh and Bashar al-Assad forces.
He also noted that followingthe November election Washington may also send additional special forces toassist "moderate rebels" onthe ground intheir fight againstDaesh and most notably the Syrian government.




[caption id="" align="alignnone" width="835"]Hundreds Protest in Washington Against US Strike on Syria Hundreds Protest in Washington Against US Strike on Syria[/caption]

Most recently, US scholars Dennis Ross and Andrew Tabler argued aboutthe need tokick offa bombing campaign againstAssad's forces. They added that the counterterrorism part ofUS Syrian strategy should not be a priority.
"A recent example is an op-ed byDennis Ross and Andrew Tabler ofthe Washington Institute forNear East Policy that argues for a bombing campaign againstthe Assad regime and expresses opposition toany cooperation withRussia instriking violent extremist groups such asISIS [Daesh] and the Al-Qaeda-affiliated al-Nusra Front," Paul R. Pillar, a CIA veteran and nonresident Senior Fellow atthe Brookings Institution, points outin his recent article forThe National Interest.


The CIA veteran notes that such an approach would bring more harm thangood and is unlikely tosolve the refugee problem.


Pillar warns that increasing airstrikes againstthe Assad government inSyria could add tothe existing anti-Western sentiment and further inflame radicalism.

As forrefugees, the US military operation wouldn't tackle the problem: "as far asrefugees are concerned, people can become refugees just aseasily asa result offighting againstthe Assad regime asthey can fromfighting againstISIS [Daesh] or Nusra [Front]."
"The op-ed makes the erroneous assumption that creating the conditions fora political settlement is all a matter ofimposing sufficient costs onthe Syrian regime and getting its Russian and Iranian backers toshed their presumed belief (another erroneous assumption byRoss and Tabler, forwhich they provide no evidence) that a purely military outcome ofthe conflict is possible," Pillar underscores.


The CIA veteran explains that it takes more thanone side tomake a political settlement.


He calls attention tothe fact that so-called "Syrian rebels" are not seemingly willing tocompromise and bythrowing its weight behindthe Islamist fighters Washington is likely toincrease this unwillingness and "obduracy."

"Proxy wars can get settled only when all sides, not just one side, see a continued war asa hurting stalemate," Pillar stresses.

There is yet another flaw inRoss and Tabler's logic, according tothe CIA veteran: they fail toclarify America's interests do and don't lie inSyria.
The proponents ofa more muscular policy inSyria should realize that even a "shaky compromise" will require all parties tocooperate inthe region, including Russia and Iran, Pillar emphasizes.


By Sputnik News



https://theiranproject.com/vdcfevd0mw6d0va.r7iw.html
Your Name
Your Email Address