Civil War in Syria

[Mr. Morden]

Is it me, or is the Syrian civil war starting to look as much like Bosnia as Libya?

[Mr. Morden]

Here's a far more bleak take on intervention in Syria:

http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/

[Mr. Morden]

The "Bashar al-Assad to no longer be President of Syria before midnight ET 31 Dec 2012" market on Intrade traded at 60.0 on last transaction....highest it's been in several months.

[Mr. Morden]

One of the rumors is that the defense minister and deputy were killed by someone on the inside (possibly one of their own security guards), because the thinking is that it would have taken someone on the inside to get that close to them.

[Mr. Morden]

The case for pessimism!: The violence in Syria may be a long way from being over:

link

[Mr. Morden]

I'm reminded of this epic quote from Baghdad Bob:

"It has been rumored that we have fired scud missiles into Kuwait. I am here now to tell you, we do not have any scud missiles and I don't know why they were fired into Kuwait."

[Mr. Morden]

"Assad to no longer be President of Syria by Dec. 31, 2012" is down to 46.1 on Intrade.  It hasn't been a good couple of weeks for the opposition, though I still think Assad is doomed in the long run.

[Mr. Morden]

The rebels are gaining ground:

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/11/21/gunning_for_damascus

[Mr. Morden]

Here's more detail on the rebel gains:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/22/us-syria-crisis-idUSBRE8AJ1FK20121122

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Morden]

Let's hope this is a real turning point in the fight and not another "end of the Assad regime in sight" moment.

I think Assad is toast in the long run, but I don't read these gains as meaning that the regime's collapse is imminent.  There's still a long way to go.  And even once Assad is dislodged from Damascus (whenever that may be), I'm not optimistic about the fighting ending anytime soon after that.  Since there's a much stronger sectarian character to this war than there was in the Libyan civil war, it seems likely that the Sunnis and Alawites would keep fighting each other for many years to come, a la Iraq in the mid/late-2000s.

[Mr. Morden]

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/05/15706380-syria-loads-chemical-weapons-into-bombs-military-awaits-assads-order?lite&google_editors_picks=true

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Morden]

If Russia says the rebels may win, and is planning like the end might be near... then the end is probably near.

Even if Assad is dislodged from Damascus, which could still be months away, that's hardly "the end".  The war will most likely keep going for years in a different form, as the Sunnis, Alawites, and others keep killing each other.

[Mr. Morden]

http://www.thenational.ae/thenationalconversation/comment/as-rebels-make-inroads-their-friends-of-syria-are-nervous#ixzz2EnY6j0QI

You must be logged in to read this quote.

EDIT: Also, here's an excellent interview with Syria expert Joshua Landis:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbG1nPaxgwY

He gives his take on the most likely scenario from about the 14:50 mark until around the 24 minute mark.

[Mr. Morden]

More Joshua Landis on Syria, and why the war could still go on for many years after Assad leaves Damascus and retreats to the Alawite heartland:

http://bloggingheads.tv/videos/13845?in=07:32&out=12:41v

[Mr. Morden]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/britain-france-claim-syria-used-chemical-weapons/2013/04/18/f17a2e7c-a82f-11e2-a8e2-5b98cb59187f_print.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Mr. Morden]

Why would Syria want Turkey in the war? Color me skeptical.

Pro-Assad bombers doesn't necessarily mean bombers taking orders from Assad.  They could just be members of some pro-Assad militia lashing out at Turkey for aiding the rebels, not really thinking through the geopolitical consequences.

[Mr. Morden]

Hassan Nasrallah went on TV earlier in the day and made his most emphatic statement of support for Assad to date:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/middleeast/la-fg-syria-fighting-hezbollah-20130526,0,7835258.story

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Then a few hours later, two rockets hit Beirut neighborhoods that are strongholds of Hezbollah:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/05/26/lebanon-hezbollah-beirut-syria/2361459/

Though we don't know who fired them.  Presumably either Israel or Syrian rebels?  Or Sunni islamists who are sympathetic to the Syrian rebels?  Who the heck knows anymore, with this many players now involved?

[Mr. Morden]

North Korean military officers are now on the ground in Syria, helping Assad

I think we can now say everyone is involved there.

This isn't a war anymore, it's a [inks]ing freakshow.

The next step is for some Minuteman volunteers to go to Damascus to protect the US border from incursions by Syrian refugees.

[Mr. Morden]

Qusair finally fell to government forces after two weeks of fighting: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22778310

Bad news for the rebels. Without foreign intervention, it's looking like they will lose.

I don't think Assad can actually "win" in the sense that he'll never have enough forces to hold the whole country together at once.  But a stalemate that goes on for years and years is certainly possible.  How long did the Lebanese Civil War last?  15 years?

[Mr. Morden]

The US has secretly been training Syrian rebels at bases in Jordan and Turkey since late last year:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/middleeast/la-fg-cia-syria-20130622,0,4448399.story

[Mr. Morden]

The Kurds have also fought independently of the FSA and the Islamists, and in some cases have had skirmishes with them, though I think they mostly keep their distance.

[Mr. Morden]

From reading the media coverage of the likely US military response to Assad's use of chemical weapons....

Sounds like this'll be something like Operation Desert Fox in 1998, when the US and UK bombed Iraq for four days, in retaliation for Saddam Hussein's lack of cooperation with weapons inspectors.  A limited operation of a few days designed to "punish" the target regime, not to dislodge it from power.  No indication that the US or NATO is going to become the air force of the Syrian rebels, a la what happened in Libya.

[Mr. Morden]

You guys should all watch this lengthy discussion with Syria expert Josua Landis on the state of the civil war there:

http://bloggingheads.tv/videos/21398

Though if you're pressed for time, they get to the heart of the matter in this ~11 minute clip:

http://bloggingheads.tv/videos/21398?in=22:52&out=34:04

Some quick notes on Landis's take from the discussion:

-The conspiracy theories, about the chemical weapons attack being a false flag by the rebels, don't really make any sense for a host of reasons (including the scale of operation, and the implausbility of so many people being in on it without the truth leaking out).  Of course, that doesn't rule out the possibility that it was a lower level commander rather than Assad who ordered it.

-The Islamists wield influence among the rebel ranks that's disproportionate to their numbers, and they're responsible for most/all recent rebel victories.  The FSA is in bed with Islamist groups, and contracts out operations to them all the time.

-Because of the FSA's alliance with Islamists, the US doesn't really like the idea of the rebels "winning" and them getting the chemical weapons, but neither does it want Assad to win.  The US supports the rebels just enough to stop them from losing, but not enough to allow them to win.  Thus the US's policy has the effect of creating an everlasting stalemate, prolonging the war indefinitely.

-The US's stated policy goal is a negotiated settlement between the parties for some kind of unity government, but that's completely implausible because of how much the parties hate each other.

-*However*, if the stalemate continues for years and years, and the battle lines start to freeze, then what you get is de facto partition of Syria into two (or more) countries, with Assad controlling the south and west, and the rebels controlling the north and east (with the Kurds potentially controlling their own plot of land in the northeast).  Partition might not actually be such a bad outcome, considering that all other scenarios are so awful.  However, no one actually wants to discuss this as an option right now.  Maybe that'll change in another year or two or three though.

[Mr. Morden]

The government has basically won on the ground thanks to rebel infighting and the West pulling military aid.

The government still seems to be light years away from being able to retake the rebel-held territory in the north and east.  Seems like the country's been divided, and locked in a stalemate for some time now, and that could continue for years to come.

[Mr. Morden]

We need to call a truce with Assad and focus on ISIS for the time being. If we could work with the Soviet Union to defeat fascism in Europe, we can work with Assad's Syria to defeat Islamism in the Middle East.

Assad is a threat to the Syrian people. ISIS is a threat to all people. We have to pick the least worst option.

In the absense of evidence that ISIS has concrete plans to launch terrorist attacks in the West, I fail to see how ISIS in Syria is enough of a threat to merit bombing them, just so that Assad can retake territory from them.  ISIS in Syria is bad for Syria.  Assad in Syria is bad for Syria.  Why should we bomb one of them to help the other?  Especially since bombing ISIS in Syria and thus helping Assad risks unraveling the US's existing alliances with Sunni governments in the region.