Civil War in Syria

[Yelnoc]

There is no oil in Syria.

Perhaps not, but getting rid of the Assad regime would further isolate the mullahs of Iran and leave terrorist groups like Hezbollah hanging in the wind and vulnerable to Lebanon (now freed of Syrian domination) and Israel.  I am sure both states would be more than happy to put Hezbollah in its place.  

That is my interest in the matter -geopolitical.  

Personally I am terrified of the prospect of a bosnia-type situation emerging. Supporting any one side would likely just lead to ethnic conflict on an even wider scale. Also I am not so sure that toppling the Syrian gov. would be as easy as Libya (and that obviously took a good amount of time).

If the actions taken thus far by the Arab League are of any indication, it seems they have decided that the benefits of the ouster of the Assad regime in Syria outweigh the risks -significant though they are (and not to be taken lightly).  They are already planning for a post-Assad Syria through their interactions with the Syrian National Council.    

The SNC is not the body to talk with.  The Free Syrian Army are doing the fighting, and if Assad is ousted, they will be calling the shots (at least initially). 

On the subject of foreign intervention, I question that the Syrian opposition will be any more supportive of Turkish intervention than they would be of full-blown NATO intervention.  In fact, this could very well stoke old fears of the Turks trying to establish a new Ottoman Empire, however irrational that may seem.

[Yelnoc]

There is no oil in Syria.

Perhaps not, but getting rid of the Assad regime would further isolate the mullahs of Iran and leave terrorist groups like Hezbollah hanging in the wind and vulnerable to Lebanon (now freed of Syrian domination) and Israel.  I am sure both states would be more than happy to put Hezbollah in its place.  

That is my interest in the matter -geopolitical.  

Personally I am terrified of the prospect of a bosnia-type situation emerging. Supporting any one side would likely just lead to ethnic conflict on an even wider scale. Also I am not so sure that toppling the Syrian gov. would be as easy as Libya (and that obviously took a good amount of time).

If the actions taken thus far by the Arab League are of any indication, it seems they have decided that the benefits of the ouster of the Assad regime in Syria outweigh the risks -significant though they are (and not to be taken lightly).  They are already planning for a post-Assad Syria through their interactions with the Syrian National Council.    

The SNC is not the body to talk with.  The Free Syrian Army are doing the fighting, and if Assad is ousted, they will be calling the shots (at least initially). 

On the subject of foreign intervention, I question that the Syrian opposition will be any more supportive of Turkish intervention than they would be of full-blown NATO intervention.  In fact, this could very well stoke old fears of the Turks trying to establish a new Ottoman Empire, however irrational that may seem.

Well, Turkey became very active in the Arab world recently and Aknara's ambitions to play bigger role in the region are no secret. Turkey's influence and, in some cases, prestige is growing and they would be idiots to waste it by entering Syria, because, as Yelnoc rightly pointed out, it will awake all demons of the past.

But, as much as I dislike Erdogan, he's not an idiot.

There is another angle that I just thought of.  Kurdish Syrians are playing a big part in the armed resistance to Assad's regime.  Might this display of force give the Turkish Kurds (and/or the Iraqi Kurds) ideas?  I do not think Erdogan (or a successor of his) would ever order a crackdown on an ethnic minority in this day and age, but the world is a crazy place.

[Yelnoc]

*bump*

So, is this conflict going to continue forever?  Can any side be said to have "momentum" right now?

"Momentum"? No, not really. The Kurds made big gains recently, but the Arab population around Tal Abyad doesn't seem particularly happy to be added to the Kurdish confederation; there appears to be an ongoing ISIS insurgency in that area. And if Turkey actually follows through and invades the strip from Jarablus to the Afrin border, that would most certainly halt Kurdish momentum, and be a great boost to Al Qaeda (Al-Nusra and Friends) and the other paramilitary groups we call "the rebels" fighting in the Aleppo region.

If I had to make a prediction, I'd guess that Assad will abandon his "four corners" strategy and pull back to a more easily defensible line from Damascus to Latakia, leaving the rebels to squabble over interior Syria. But interior Syria and western Iraq will probably be a hellhole of one kind or another for years to come.

[Yelnoc]

*bump*

So, is this conflict going to continue forever?  Can any side be said to have "momentum" right now?

"Momentum"? No, not really. The Kurds made big gains recently, but the Arab population around Tal Abyad doesn't seem particularly happy to be added to the Kurdish confederation; there appears to be an ongoing ISIS insurgency in that area. And if Turkey actually follows through and invades the strip from Jarablus to the Afrin border, that would most certainly halt Kurdish momentum, and be a great boost to Al Qaeda (Al-Nusra and Friends) and the other paramilitary groups we call "the rebels" fighting in the Aleppo region.

If I had to make a prediction, I'd guess that Assad will abandon his "four corners" strategy and pull back to a more easily defensible line from Damascus to Latakia, leaving the rebels to squabble over interior Syria. But interior Syria and western Iraq will probably be a hellhole of one kind or another for years to come.

This is a rather good analyse, Assad are loking like he's beginning to focus on his core territories, and leaving "government" areas outside this to loyalist Sunni tribes and the random religious minority (mostly Druzes, as the Assyrians outside the core territories have mostly joined the Kurds). So what we're de facto seeing are a split up of Syria into several state-like structures. From a Druze run As-Suwayda Governorate, the Kurdish areas (who seem to be in alliance with the last "moderate" FSA units and the Assyrians), Al Nusra (Al Qaeda) around Aleppo and ISIS. With areas near the Iraqi border being fought over by Sunni tribal loyalist and ISIS and Daara being a cluster fought over by a ISIS, Al Nusra (includes FSA), the Druzes, local Shias etc.

How you put up all of the above text without a map?

This map, from yesterday, should help you make sense of the situation



Feel free to ask if you have any questions. The situation is quite complex, but I've been following it long enough to have a decent understanding at least of the factions involved.

[Yelnoc]

Another problem are that a partition basedf on the borders and factions on the map, would result in a Al Nusra (Al Qaeda) and a ISIS state. This are not a viable solution. The only solution of ISIS are the complete destruction of it, Al Nusra on the other hand, while connected to Al Qaeda are more moderate than ISIS but still horrible and it's mostly based on local Syrians rather than foreign adventures. So maybe a compromise could be reached. But still do anyone want a Al Qaeda Emirate in  northern syria.

You're not seriously suggesting Jabhat al-Nusra is the "moderate" option these days, right?

Ideologically, Nusra and the Islamic State are identical. But tactically they couldn't be more different. Where Daesh is open about their desire to establish a global caliphate, Nusra is framing their goal as one of "liberating" Syrian and establishing a caliphate within the borders of the Syrian Republic. Also, Nusra is much more open to coalition with other rebel groups, for instance, in Aleppo under Ansar al-Sharia. So its reasonable, I think, to say that Nusra tactics and aims are more "moderate" than the Islamic States', despite the other obvious similarities.