Being honest about what sort of conflict Syria is really fighting is the first step in finding a real solution to end it. The West continues to insist this is a "civil war." This allows them to continue trying to influence the outcome of the conflict and the political state Syria will exist in upon its conclusion. By claiming that the Syrian government has lost all legitimacy, the West further strengthens its hand in this context.Mr. Gunnar is not alone in arguing (elsewhere in his article) that ISIS, al Nusra, and al Qaida are creatures of Western governments. The idea that they are solely creatures of the Wahhabists and other sunni fanatics is highly suspect, if not unsupportable.
Attempts to strip the government of legitimacy predicated on the fact that it stood and fought groups of armed militants arrayed against it by an axis of foreign interests would set a very dangerous and unacceptable precedent. It is no surprise that Syria finds itself with an increasing number of allies in this fight as other nations realize they will be next if the "Syria model" is a success.
Assad's fault. Acknowledging that Syria's ongoing conflict is the result of foreign aggression against Damascus would make the solution very simple. The solution would be to allow Damascus to restore order within its borders while taking action either at the UN or on the battlefield against those nations fueling violence aimed at Syria. Perhaps the clarity of this solution is why those behind this conflict have tried so hard to portray it as a civil war.
For those who have been trying to make sense of the Syrian "civil war" since 2011 with little luck, the explanation is simple, it isn't a civil war and it never was. Understanding it as a proxy conflict from the very beginning (or even before it began) will give one a clarity in perception that will aid one immeasurably in understanding what the obvious solutions are, but only when they come to this understanding.[1]
Notes
[1] "Syria: It's Not a Civil War and it Never Was." By Ulson Gunnar, New Eastern Outlook, 12/28/15.
H/t: Land Destroyer Report.
I for one have little sympathy for the Syrians. For hundreds of years they have been at the forefont of petty, violent, tribal warfare that is the hallmark of the Arab world. History is full of the stories of Westerners who become fascinated with the Arab world only to become disillusioned with it uglier realities. Most notably read the works of T.E. Lawrence who after helping the Arabs defeat the Ottomans during WWI left concluding the Arabs and especially the Syrian tribes (this includes the so-called Palestinians) were little more than violently quaralsome children.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDelete“For those who have been trying to make sense of the Syrian “civil war” since 2011 with little luck, the explanation is simple, it isn’t a civil war and it never was. Understanding it as a proxy conflict from the very beginning (or even before it began) will give one a clarity in perception that will aid one immeasurably in understanding what the obvious solutions are, but only when they come to this understanding.[1] ”
So what we have here is a modern version of the Spanish Civil War of 1936 – 1939 in which the fascist AXIS of Germany and Italy dominated the Spanish nationalists led by Franco against the Spanish Republic led by Spanish Communists, who were sock puppets of the Soviet Union and the International Socialists.
The Spanish Civil War was the testing ground weapons and tactics used in WW II and the classic war by proxy.
It could well be that the Syrian Civil War is the run up to WW III.
JWMJR, I remember that from Lawrence's book. Anne Marie Waters's investigation of Muslim grooming gangs in Britain that appeared in Gates of Vienna yesterday will tell you all you want to know about the darkness of the Muslim soul. What is rotten in Riyadh Karachi is not minority behavior in the Muslim world. They mostly love their most rotten aspects. A brave Pakistani man tried to deal with the problem of killing "blasphemers" and was killed for his trouble. Waters also revealed what is rotten in Britain today, but that's another story.
ReplyDeleteThat said, there are two basic points about Syria that guide my thinking. First, the Syrians appear to be a genuine in their support for a (relatively) secular country. Compared to all other Muslim countries it seems to be an ok place to live. Whatever Islam has created in the past and in other countries does not appear to be operating in Syria. A general impression only and not based on extensive reading or experience.
Second, the U.S. is lying about its reasons for involving itself there. It is lying about the nature of Assad's government. It is allied with the worst of all the Islamic barbarians out there (and in Syria).
Syria may be as awful now as an extrapolation fro Lawrence's book might reasonably allow. Point two, however, has to be seen in the overall mad scheme of U.S. involvement in the world when our own borders are insecure. We need to stop meddling in Syria and supporting the dirtiest of Islamic movements.
Ronald, I have had that exact thought. The Spanish Civil War wasn't the cause of WWII but it was a foretaste with all the elements you describe. Local problems got inflated into a bid deal international testing ground. It didn't spin out of control but Syria has a great potential to do that. Whatever is really driving the U.S. to interfere there is not clear. As Putin has upped the ante and now threatens to defeat ISIS -- our most important ally there -- the danger is that Obama's hidden agenda will drive him to become directly involved in bringing down Assad. That's not far fetched. No one likes to admit they've been outmaneuvered. Obama has in the past relented when a face-saving way out was presented. Obama can't object when Russia does in fact attack ISIS and it's the weakest of objections to say Putin's attacking "the opposition" which clearly has the stink of al Qaida and Turkish support on it. Kerry's gone to Moscow and made nice so maybe The Big Ramp Up isn't in the stars.
ReplyDeleteJunior Geostrategerist signing off.
In light of the above comments we should not look at the various factions in Syria as not so much wholly manufacture instruments of western, American, Saudi, Iranian etc. policy, but rather puppets in a limited (so far) geopolitical conflict over who is going to control or at least dominate global energy flows. Just as in Spain where the factions, cultural and regional differences already existed, still exist, that were then used by the fascists and communists in there larger game of European domination.
ReplyDeleteSyria and Iraq should also be seen as something akin to Yugoslavia. Artificial geopolitical constructs that could only be held together by singular dominant individuals or parties and or real, perceived and/or manufactured outside threats. Then through in the centuries old Sunni vs, Shia conflict coupled with Islamic and particularly Arab deep psyco-sexual inadequacy and you get a seething cauldron of conflicts that give free rain to every human weakness, cruelty, and violent evil.
It is these weaknesses and evils that are being manipulated and being given power to create the instability, uncertainty and fear that has always been the mainstay of imperial conflicts.
The shrinking influence of US power and influence coupled with its increasing economic instability can't help but give rise to revanchist powers in both Turkey and Russia both seeking to fill the vacuum.
I would characterize the whole mess as the 19th century Russo/Ottoman conflict,melded with the Yugoslavian meltdown, with the Spanish Civil War thrown in for good measure. The chances that it won't lead to global conflict are virtually nil.
Best reread the Book of Revelations. seems the score card was written long ago. But who am I to point out the obvious?!!?
That's a melange of swirling interest that makes as much sense as anything. No sarcasm intended.
ReplyDeleteThe bedrock phenomenon is the desire to control energy though that's not an entirely satisfactory explanation. I am under the impression that the amount of oil in the M.E. (ex S. Arabia) is nothing like the quantities available in S.A. On the surface it doesn't seem like it would warrant the attention of the U.S. or the Saudis. The possible Qatar Turkey gas line seems more of a threat to Russia but I don't see it as something that would send them flying off into a big foreign adventure. I just don't see this Russian military adventurism and USSR 2.0 that Cliff Kincaid peddles with such energy. Erdogun most definitely has stars in his eyes about a new Turkish empire and seems the most dangerous man east of the Lesbians on Lesbos.
It's American adventurism that scares me. In fact, the whole Western world is in the grip of something evil, weak, and suicidal. So good luck figuring out what "NATO" is doing, or what France or Britain are doing, or what Merkel's doing. Some kind of fantastical, happy horse globaloney (h/t C.B. Luce) near as I can tell.
I'm not a student of the Bible and Revelation seems even more dense and incomprehensible to me than the preceding chapters. However, if it stands for the idea that mankind can create holy hell on earth before Judgment Day, I have to say A+ on that. Playing with fire doesn't begin to describe what we're doing in the world today and vast quantities of blood seem certain to be spilled when common sense returns. But, meanwhile, common sense is long gone.
There;s a very clear solution to the ISIS/Syria/Middle East problem and has been from day 1: blanket strategic strikes on all military and population centers. The war could be over in half a day, and the US wouldn't even notice, and it would cost basically zero dollars (as Obama plans to retire much of the stockpile anyway) and zero America lives.
ReplyDeleteTo quote the man who God willing, Democrat-fraud permitting, will be the next president: “What good does it do to have a good nuclear triad if you’re afraid to use it?”
Andrew, I would hope you intended leaving Israel out of such bombing, although it wasn't stated specifically. Obama's "ISIL" stands for "islamic State of Iraq and the Levant", with "Levant" being an area that includes modern-day Israel.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, if such bombing were to cover all muslims cities and military installations, I'd agree. Few people understand how dangerous islam is to the rest of the people on Earth. This cancer has been in existence for over 1400 years, and while it has been in remission several times, it keeps flaring up and threatening to metastasize throughout the body of humanity. The original "lesions", if you will permit me to continue the analogy, are Mecca, Medina, and Qom.
I hesitate to include Iran, because I believe there is a significantly large group of Iranians who would prefer a secular state. There are still older Iranians alive who remember living a life that was not ruled by sharia. The "Green Movement" in Iran was completely ignored by our islam-loving president, without even a word of support or encouragement. I think that, if the current religious government of Iran was crippled by the bombing of their military and nuclear weapon sites, it is possible the Iranian people _might_ rise up and finish the job. But, maybe not - I may have misread what the Green Movement was striving for. Look at us and what we tolerate from our own government, for pete's sake.
That quote is from Trump's spokeswoman, Katrina Pierson. It represents an astonishing ignorance of the purpose of the triad. What Trump thinks or what he's said to her since, I don't know. But amen to his being the next president.
ReplyDeleteI like the idea of taking death and destruction to the Muslim world. It has cheerfully taken it to us and I don't believe for a minute that all terror used against us has not had the heartfelt support of the overwhelming majority of Muslims. Still, a lot of innocents would be killed with such a strategy and the attacks on Dresden are instructive on their moral dimensions.
My objection to such bombing on practical grounds is that if we had the will to do that, and did it, it would leave the presence of Muslims in the Western world unaddressed. They are a veritable gall stone that will forever remain to inflict horrendous pain. Population transfer is the only way to slice through the Gordian knot of how to deal with Muslims among infidels. We simply should not have to deal with the problem and because our treasonous and flaccid leaders in the past chose treason, temporary business advantage, or Chesterton's woolyheaded humanitarianism is not a compelling argument for not removing the destructive presence they engineered.
The very sweetest revenge on the Muslim savages would be to require them to live only in Muslim lands with limited Western or other technical help to extract oil. If the Sunni=Shia dealy is that important to them then let them have at it to their hearts' content.
A neo-colonial appropriation of M.E. oil should also be effected. Oil is far too critical a resource to leave it in the hands of savages and terrorists and enrich them at the same time. It's absurd. A new organization: Organization of Oil-Consuming Countries (OOCC).
The early part of the last century was a time where man became besotted with dreams of what "rational" technocrats in all fields could accomplish now that the last vestiges of the Dark Ages had well and truly been eliminated. That stupid and Godless experiment has played out in the ensuing 100 years at great cost, he said by way of understatement. Perhaps it is time for a reactionary vision to inform our politics. Liberalism was discredited by the First World War just as the war paved the way for statism and central controls. Let's start with that brand of liberalism. It's not complicated. Multiculturalism, welfare, and income redistribution are. Moral decay is at the heart of each of those three.
Nationalism must rise again. The folly of mixing races and cultures is visible all around us. The black minority has laid waste to city after city. Los Angeles -- and California itself -- have become a third-world enclave that daily is losing its character as territory inside sovereign America. The Muslims excel at no-go areas and constant chivying for the imposition of their alien law. Sharia? How absurd.
It seems to me just unloading a boatload of bombs 5,000 away doesn't begin to address the more important problems and the new opportunities that will reveal themselves as people throw off this moronic universalism.
Long live xenophobes, particularists, nativists, nationalist, separatists, and immigration restrictionists everywhere.