Syria: a civil war (closed)

**Uboat509** · 03-14-2012

Originally Posted by jmm99

This article leads me to a second question for military experts (the first one - a Turkish-Syrian 1 on 1 - is still on the table):

Regards

Mike

JMM,

I do not claim to be an expert on Turkish, Syrian or Iranian military strength. I am inclined to believe that, no matter what, Iran is unlikely to become directly involved in any military intervention in Syria, especially against Turkey. For a start, Iran has worked long and hard to cultivate goodwill among populations of the Sunni Arab states (though not necessarily with the governments of those states). I do not believe that it will be prepared to squander that by attacking another Muslim state in order to protect a regime that is probably doomed anyway. Iran is acutely aware that whatever goodwill that it has managed to build in the Sunni Arab states (mostly through the rhetoric directed at Israel and the West), is fragile. If it takes too strong a stance on supporting Assad then it runs the risk of fomenting a big anti-Shia/anti-Persian backlash, something that more than one Sunni Arab government would be more than happy to support. On top of this, Iran is still faced with the possibility of a military intervention on its own soil. It more likely to want to conserve both its military forces and any goodwill on the part of its Sunni Arab neighbors as a hedge against such an eventuality. I believe that the keystone of Iranian foreign policy has been to keep Arab animosity focused on Israel and the West, and therefore off of Iran. Direct action against Turkey could undo that rapidly. For all their bluff and bluster, I believe that Iran is far more rational than they are given credit for.

That said, I do believe that Iran would have no problem quietly stirring up the Kurds against Turkey. They need little enough stirring as it is. That could create all sorts of problems for Turkey. If the Kurds were to ratchet the violence up against Turkey it would almost certainly invite an even more brutal crackdown by the Turkish military, which needs little provocation anyway. Such crackdowns are damaging to Turkey's carefully cultivated image of a rational, moderate and enlightened modern state. For the time being, Turkey seems to have lost some of its enthusiasm for joining the EU (which is rapidly becoming damaged goods anyway) but that does not mean they have shut the door on the possibility. Kurdish problems do not help them on that regard and Iran knows that and who is better at operating through proxies than Iran?

That is my take anyway.

**jmm99** · 03-14-2012

A professional answer from a professional. Thank you.

Timely in view of your comments is, in TZ, Russia says it won't intervene militarily in Syria:

14 March 2012 / AP, MOSCOW

Russia's foreign minister says Moscow is providing Syria with weapons to fend off external threats but has no intention to use military force to protect Syrian President Bashar Assad.

Sergey Lavrov said Wednesday that Russia isn't supplying any arms that could be used against protesters.

He told lawmakers that a military intervention in Syria would contradict Russia's national interests.

Regards

Mike

**Uboat509** · 03-15-2012

Originally Posted by jmm99

Russia says it won't intervene militarily in Syria.

Regards

Mike

You never know when you might need your military forces to "shore up" public support for the regime. Just sayin'...

**Uboat509** · 03-15-2012

The more I think about it the more I think that US (or any other Western state) intervention in Syria would be a gift to Iran. That would potentially allow them to play the anti-imperialist/anti-crusader (or take your pick) card and take a more direct role in supporting the Assad regime. I very much doubt that they would risk a full scale invasion but they certainly could be more overt about sending materials and "volunteers" with less risk of a backlash in Sunni Arab opinion. That is a potential catfight we do not need to get dragged into right now (or ever really). The Arab Spring has shown Arabs that these authoritarian regimes can be over thrown. Assad's forces may clear an area but as soon as they leave the rebels come back. That is not a sustainable position for the regime, not indefinitely. If the rebels could somehow convince Syria's minorities, such as the Christians that they would be protected from a Sunni backlash after the fall of the regime it would hugely undermine Assad's support. Unfortunately, that is probably an academic argument. I am not so sure that they can be protected, even if the leadership of the rebellion wants to. Even if they could be protected I am also not so sure that those minority groups could be convinced that they would be protected. The fact that two thirds of Iraq's pre-war Christian population has fled Iraq does not set a particularly encouraging precedent.

**davidbfpo** · 03-16-2012

Looking for information on Syria yesterday I found this Us-hosted website:

The Syrian Center for Political and Strategic Studies (SCPSS) is an independent nongovernmental studies center. SCPSS mission is to educate readers and activists about the Syrian Arab Republic from political, economic, social and strategic perspectives.

Link:http://www.scpss.org/index.php?pid=1

Another blogsite is:http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/