Syrians in the Sheraton; a lesson in time wasting
The title of the article on the Doha summit is 'Syrians in the Sheraton; a lesson in time wasting', a rather pithy commentary - with some odd asides:http://www.opendemocracy.net/michael...n-time-wasting
Quote:
So what can we read from this whole saga? The short answer is that the SNC are being side-lined, and they know it, and this is why they played for time. The Riad Seif initiative was a threat to their previous hegemonic control over the Syrian opposition, and they have fought for every inch they can to maintain as much of a foothold as possible in the new plan. Backed heavily by Qatar and the USA, the SNI is the only realistic plan forward at this current point. It brings together military personnel with politicians and other exiles to try and forge a coalition that can speak for Syria’s beleaguered people.
Behind all the "spin" and diplomacy the fact remains that the USA does not want to get involved in the Syrian civil war. The Assad regime is hanging on.
The Assad regime is hanging on
The title was my very short comment a few posts back. In support is FP Blog's piece:http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article...ivor?page=full
The Battle of the Supply Lines in Syria
The Battle of the Supply Lines in Syria
Entry Excerpt:
--------
Read the full post and make any comments at the SWJ Blog.
This forum is a feed only and is closed to user comments.
More lethality - without CW?
Given the mixed, even contrary reporting on Syrian chemical weapons I am not sure what is going on.
Sometimes I suspect it is a "fig leaf" for enhancing Western diplomacy and reducing the leverage China, Iran and Russia have. You can almost hear the official statement "We had to act, Bashir was about to use CW"; maybe even a spectacular UN presentation?
Enduring America notes:
Quote:
on chemical weapons, Lavrov suggested that Assad would not use them, and this would be a "red line" for Russia as well:
“For us, any violations of international agreements in this area are unacceptable," Lavrov stressed.
Link:http://www.enduringamerica.com/home/...surge-but.html
Shashank Joshi questions whether CW is useful; it is July 2012 and may have been posted before:http://shashankjoshi.wordpress.com/2...ons-effective/
I have not been following Syria closely and had missed this:
Quote:
For starters, the fall of Deir Ez Zor will free up large waves of (largely Iraqi) insurgents to attack to the north....Furthermore, the sudden emergence of large numbers of Iraqi fighters, many of them radical, in the east is concerning
Yes Bashir's regime is getting more ruthless, notably in using air power in urban areas; such as a MIG-23:http://theaviationist.com/2012/12/05.../#.UMB5zuTtT0f
There are also reports of Grad rockets being used; when will we see Scud SSM being used?
Site Security at Syrian Chemical Weapons Sites: An Educated Guess
A Turkish student @ Kings London comments, drawing upon the known Soviet experience with CW:http://turkeywonk.wordpress.com/2012...ducated-guess/
Worrying about the wrong user?
From FP one of the better comments on the situation; the title being 'Why Assad Won’t Use His Chemical Weapons; And why you should still be worried':http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article...pons?page=full
Charles Blair ends with:
Quote:
Were chemical agents to fall into the hands of armed factions battling for control of the nation, the implications would be stark and ominous. So, the United States is right to worry about Syria's chemical weapons -- it may just be worried about them for the wrong reason.
He does say earlier:
Quote:
The good news is that few terrorist groups would actually be able to use any [chemical] materials they acquired.