Hadi al-Bahra, the head of the self-proclaimed government-in-exile of Syria, the Syrian National Coalition (SNC), today blasted the US for its attacks on ISIS, saying they are undermining the rebellion they think will eventually land the SNC in power.
The SNC is nominally the head of the Free Syrian Army (FSA), one of the primary “moderate” rebel factions, but one which is also virtually entirely landless, as ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra take most of the rebel territory.
Bahra insisted ISIS is only a “symptom of the problem” in Syria, and that the faction taking half of the country could be solved by the US attacking the Assad government instead.
Bahra was also critical of the US for attacking Nusra, which is al-Qaeda’s wing in Syria, saying it was undercutting the SNC’s efforts for a “permanent solution to the crisis,” which is to say their installation as the actual government.
Yeah, well, Hadi, just wait for the republicans to start sending troops to fight IS.
As it looks to me, the FSA and SNC are inconsequential. They have no ability to influence the outcome of conflicts in the region. The remaining members of those organizations are simply hoping that someone, the US, Turkey, someone invades Syria and puts them in power as a puppet government. Not going to happen.
I think, the only way for the US to salvage anything from the current situation is to eat crow and side with Assad/Iran/Russia/Hezbollah. That group will bring stability to Syria. The US hope to profit from the chaos it causes just isn't working anymore.
The only way for the US to salvage anything would be to pack up and get the hell out of the ME. Bring the troops they claim are "heroes" back to the US so they can be with their families for the holidays instead of dying for some multinational that doesn't give a ratsass about them except to keep the money flowing into the corporate coffers. They've already proven that the troops are disposable – they come back with PTSD or other traumatic injuries and then, for whatever reasons, can't seem to get the care they were promised before they were used as cannon fodder.
If the USG wanted a more stable Middle East, it would have sided with Assad from the beginning. Assad runs a secular regime that gives rights to women and does not persecute religious minorities, (like Christians). Plus Assad was recently elected by an overwhelmingly popular vote, but the USG does not recognize elections or referendums (witness Crimea) it doesn't agree with. The USG would have also not toppled Qadhafi or encouraged the ouster of Mubarak if it wanted stability. Everything that the USG does in the Middle East is done after consulting with Netanyahu and company. As Greater Israel benefits from Muslims killing Muslims, the killing will go on and on and on – or until they've all killed each other.
Doesn't this idiot Hadi al-Bahra realize that he has been sidelined? He should study the fate of the political fortunes of Ahmed Chalabi, for therein lies a tale.
To — Roy Hegge
Excellent comment.