Speaking to reporters today in Paris about the weekend Syria talks in Vienna, Secretary of State John Kerry said he believes an agreement on a ceasefire and transition to end the Syrian Civil War could be mere weeks away, saying there was a need to recognize how much the talks have accomplished.
The consensus on the need for a settlement has been growing in recent weeks, and spiked among Western nations after Friday’s Paris attacks, though everyone still seems to be holding out for their respective long-standing positions, and Kerry didn’t indicate any wiggle room on that.
That means that the question of what happens to President Assad is still up in the air, and everyone being more interested in a settlement but no more interested in compromise just means a lot more arguing about Assad’s status.
The other big question is, with everyone nominally agreeing at Vienna that this needs to be a “Syrian solution,” they still haven’t invited any Syrian factions to the talks, whether government or rebels, meaning they don’t really have anyone on board to enact this putative transition anyhow.
In other words it means NADA. Assad + regular all-party elections is Russian / Syrian / Iran side. NO CHANGE.
This shows the hypocrisy of Kerry and the foolishness of the Appeasing Lavrov, who fails to realise the vaguely worded written agreements will be interpreted in different ways understand by Washington policymakers.
This is a second Molotov – Ribbentrop Pact
Or Second Munich if you prefer it.
The Transition and Transitional Government are the means |Washington takes over countries . It is a standard part of overt Operation theory. This is how it works. There then follows elections in which Washington steals the election.
The Syrian "Regime Change" operation is dead. The French, who are once again the inventors of "French Fries" (that whole "Freedom Fries" campaign never made sense to me) have thrown their lot in with the Evil Rooskies. That strongly implies the French support the current Syrian state, having figured out that smashing the rest of Syria will just mean more refugees and unrest in the "homeland".
So now we have the "Axis of Evil", i.e., France, Russia, Iran, Iraq, and Syria vs. the "Empire of Chaos", a.k.a. Uncle Sam, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Israel. Saudi Arabia will either implode or go bankrupt, maybe both. Turkey will soon be too busy killing Kurds to worry much about Syria, and Israel's army is only good for killing kids with stones.
That just leaves Uncle Sam to send infantry to invade Syria, which he can't really afford and has little support. So Uncle Sam is pretty much limited to giving up or going nuclear. My guess is the generals won't allow the latter. As much as they love war toys and consultant contracts, they are not big on suicide.
I don't see any sign of the French "throwing in their lot with the evil Rooskies". Putin, and the Russian-funded Front National, have been trying to claim it but I don't see any sign of it. The French media reported, tongue in cheek, yesterday that Putin had ordered his commanders to welcome and assist "our allies"(sic!), i.e don't shoot them down as if they were Israelis! Since the French are sending their only carrier and since the shortest way into Syria from the Med is over so-called "Russian-controlled airspace", the French have to make some sort of overfly arrangement with Putin's people. But since the war is unwinnable anyway, pretending to be France's "ally" just drags Putin even further into the Syrian quagmire.
>I don't see any sign of the French "throwing in their lot with the evil Rooskies".
Then you are not paying attention. The French are coordinating with the Russians. Hollande is going to Moscow to meet Putin, then he's going to Washington to try to convince Obomba to get on board. I can't remember for sure, but I think this report was on the BBC World Service.
This same report also quoted Kerry as claiming that Uncle Sam is "moving towards being able to contain ISIS" (or something very close to that). He definitely used the word "contain". Only Uncle Sam and vassals are interested in "containment". The French want complete destruction of the ISIS cancer, as do the Russians, the Syrians, the Iraqis, the Iranians, and probably most of the world.
Once again, Putin the Poopyhead is working to stabilize the area, and eliminate the ISIS thugs, while Uncle Sam continues to support more chaos, death, and destruction.
I have not heard that France is throwing in with Russia. As for the "Syrian regime change" being dead. If only that were the case. There has been no indication that the U.S. or its western allies are changing policy.
This has long ceased to be a Syrian civil war. Putin's presence completely falsifies the situation, all the more so as he doesn't care one whit about Syria but just wants to hang on to his precious naval base to impress his elderly Soviet-generation supportrers back home. In practice, therefore, all the Syrian factions, including Assad are totally irrelevant to the talks. For Putin, it's "how do I keep the naval base". For everybody else it's "how do we inflict a defeat on Putin so unequivocal that it restores the balance of power in Europe". As someone commented elsewhere, poor Syria!
It was never a civil war – almost from the start most of the rebel fighters were foreigners paid for by Qataris and Saudis. As for the factions in Syria, there are four that could probably run the place, Assad, Al Nusrah, ISIS and the unicorns. Since Kerry hasn't the intelligence to do a deal with Assad and nobody (except perhaps Qatar and Saudi Arabia) is going to want either Al Nusrah or ISIS to be in charge, that leaves the unicorns as the only party to run Syria. Beyond Harmony Kendall, you and that imbecile Kerry, I can think of no one who would think that a realistic option.
BTW, stop believing the schtick that it was the war in Afghanistan that brought down the Soviet Union. To the Soviets, Afghanistan was no more that a police action in difficult terrain. The Soviet death toll in nine years was less than twice the daily average in Operation Citadel/The Battle of Kursk which lasted for about 50 days. A better comparison is probably the second Chechen War – you would think that by now the thickos in Washington would understand that a military that can achieve a "decisive victory" against the Chechens is going to have no problems dealing with the takfiri poseurs of ISIS and Al Nusrah.