Who could secure the WMD's?
I think a more interesting question, from an American perspective, is who can act to secure the WMD's without risking exacerbating the situation? I don't believe America "can" (should). If others in the region share Syria's justification for having their Nerve Agents as a deterrent to Israel's nuclear weapons and the US, an ardent backer of Israel, acts to "secure" the weapons, it is easy for opponents to the US (Al Qaeda, Iran) to portray our action as denying the post-Assad regime with the ability to defend itself from an Israeli first strike.
Add to that the fact that the US has sold itself to certain powers in the region as their protector (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, etc.) and therefore the justification for them not to have their own military capability, we have created a no win situation.
I suppose the Iranian's could offer to do it. Wouldn't that be interesting. Probably have to be the Russians if we could convince them it was in their best interest to act.
After the fall ... who will help quell the violence?
Quote:
The opposition, meanwhile, is winning territory, but its ranks are divided among some 100 groups with no clear political leadership. Even if Mr. Assad were to step down voluntarily, his Alawite military machine and its sectarian allies are likely to fight on, holding large chunks of territory.
Syria would then fracture, with the fighting deciding who controls what area — a larger version of Lebanon in the 1970s. There would be ethnic cleansing, refugee floods, humanitarian disasters and opportunities for Al Qaeda.
In Lebanon, a decade and a half of carnage was stopped only with the assistance of Syria and its army as peacemakers. A similar sectarian conflagration plunged Iraq into violence after the American invasion. There, a surge of American troops in 2007 helped stop the fighting. In Syria, there are no foreign troops to play such a role, and little prospect that any will come while the war lasts.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/29/op...ml?ref=opinion
Could a Arab force like the one proposed by Tunisia successfully enforce peace when they themselves would be similarly divided?
The not-so-secret war in Syria
A useful collection of articles on:
Quote:
on covert action and intelligence collection in and against Syria
Link:http://shashankjoshi.wordpress.com/2...-war-in-syria/
Evrybody with the ability meddles...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JMA
I suggest that for millions around the world specifically in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria the impact of US meddling - be it of a military nature or merely diplomatic - is anything but a sideshow.
The US is not the only country involved in meddling, or diplomacy, or aid, or whatever you want to call it.
In Syria alone there are the Turks, the Saudis, and the Isaerlis.
The Turks are supporting the rebels in Syria ... except for the Kurds who they fear could use a Kurd enclave in Syria to support the PKK in order to stage attacks on Turkey essentially opening up a new front.
Then there are the Iranian's who see one of their few allies failing for reasons they don't quite understand. The rest of the Arab Spring countries fall into a narrative that the people of dictatorial anti-Islamic regimes that have been propped up by the West are now falling as the people take back control. Syria doesn't neatly fit that narrative, so the Iranians believe the fault lies with external interference - that the majority of Syrians support the regime. They see this as a unholy alliance between the Saudis (those Arab Sunnis) and the West. As a result Terran sends support to Assad including weapons and advisers. There is the potential that if Assad has no other options the Iranians may directly intervene.
Quote:
"Given the issues that Iran attributes to Syria's turbulence, it is believed that Tehran will do its utmost to maintain the status quo, even it entails risking military involvement."
(http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=13924)
Then there are the Israelis who would prefer Assad to a more Islamic state. What they are doing now is hard to tell but they are certainly looking at military options should the security of Syrian WMD's become questionable. http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/157799
Everyone with the capability meddles in order to protect their own interests.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JMA
Amazing that for a bunch of guys who always claim to have all the right answers you/they get it wrong so often.
We have the same failings as everyone else; we NEED to have the events fall into a narrative that supports our national identity. We should be smarter than that, but we are as human as the next meddler.