The Arab Spring

To add to what Shinra said, even though eventually there weren't many moderates left doesn't mean that there weren't many moderates to begin with.

If Syria has reached its current situation is because Assad kept acting like he did and refused to do anything that meant he lost power.

Now that Russia has de facto control of Syria, I don't believe we can reach status quo ante bellum.

Instead of focusing on relatives that divide us, maybe we should try to find the absolutes that tie us.

Correct.

Syria is dead. Whatever comes upon its ashes will be a new entity creating a new geopolitical reality in the region. Turkey wants to change it, Turkey will have to put up or shut up and not just against the Kurds.

Final Fantasy, Foreign Policy, and Bollywood. Helluva combo, that...

I seriously can't think of any leader who comes close to Assad when it comes to lack of legitimacy.

And that's how I ended up in the wardrobe. It Just Bugs Me!

Gadaffi?

edited 5th Feb '16 10:09:31 AM by KnitTie

I think the comment meant living leaders.

Final Fantasy, Foreign Policy, and Bollywood. Helluva combo, that...

Maduro

Instead of focusing on relatives that divide us, maybe we should try to find the absolutes that tie us.

The comment on Assad's enemies being foreign puppets is rather weird when this war on Assad's side has been paid for almost entirely by Iran for the last few years (they've given his regimme $6-15 billion annually). And when Assad is only in the game because a large IRGC Expeditionary Force (2,000 Iranian officers leading ~20,000 Afghan auxiliaries and several thousand Pakistani auxiliaries) with Russian air support has been doing the recent heavy lifting. Not to mention the Iranian proxy, Hezbollah, which has also been doing a lot of the heavy lifting as Assad's forces become less and less capable after starting out at the lowest tier of competence to begin with. Then there are the other militias from places like Iraq and Palestine...

Assad is effectively an Iranian puppet at this point.

edited 5th Feb '16 10:40:20 AM by Nihlus1

I always figured he was Russia's puppet, unless they're time sharing now.

edited 5th Feb '16 12:37:57 PM by Skycobra51

Look upon my privilege ye mighty and despair.

Funny thing with puppets is that sometimes they dance on their own, I still hold to my theory that Russia and possibly also Iran are none to happy with Assad, the man bungled what was meant to be a simple bit of suppression and authoritarian assholary. I do wonder now if anyone in the Russian government has even felt a bit jealous of the US, the Saudis and Egyptians efficiently cracked down on their attempts at democracy, not much (comparative) mess and it (well the public bit) was of quickly, Assad just made a mess.

By the way, one living ruler with less legitimacy of then Assad would be Kim John Un, but that may be it.

As for the FSA having a lot of extremist fighters, the funny thing about moderates who want to try for a non-violent revolution is that they are often pretty easy to shoot. Assad systematically targeted the more moderate groups from the get go, there aren't going to be many left, though I belive we've heard relatively good things out of the south and there are always the non-Kurkish rebels that are working together with the Kurds.

"And the Bunny nails it!" ~ Gabrael "If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we." ~ Cyran

All this focus on Russia is missing the forest for the trees.

Russia hasn't given the Assad regime tens of billions of dollars even as it's failed to produce profit due to ISIL taking its oil fields. Iran has.

Russia hasn't deployed a ground expeditionary force in a direct combat role to reinforce Assad. Iran has.

Russia hasn't been fighting in Syria since 2012. Iran has.

Russia doesn't stand to get seriously screwed over if Assad's regime collapses. Iran does.

Russia gains more if he wins. They have been sending expeditionary forces (not in as high numbers as Iran, but are sending special forces and trainers to basically rebuild a Syrian Arab military). They send air power. They send high end weaponry for the area. They give diplomatic cover. They've also basically been given land in exchange for these services for terms that are quite generous (as in, just as generous as colonial powers got in Africa and India back in the day). Russia is as much in here for the long term as Iran.

Also, the focus has been on Russia only recently due to Knit asking about it. Iran's involvement has been discussed here at length. The idea that one is more important than the other with regards to Assad and Syria misses the point that the two efforts complement each other and fill gaps the other can't fill.

It is, essentially a colonial co-dominion, as suggested by Silas.

edited 5th Feb '16 1:11:57 PM by FFShinra

Final Fantasy, Foreign Policy, and Bollywood. Helluva combo, that...

There are plenty of Syrian moderates, it's just that they are mostly ex-pats, having left the country (for obvious reasons). They tend not to get along very well with the armed opposition.

"We learn from history that we do not learn from history."

Not quite right. The moderates themselves WERE the armed opposition as well as the politcal opposition until they realized they needed money and training. And as war tends to polarize ones mindset, the moderates with guns found it easier and easier just to side with whoever would takeout Assad while the political opposition bickered amongst themselves.

Final Fantasy, Foreign Policy, and Bollywood. Helluva combo, that...

It is generally forgotten now, but the Syrian crisis began with an "Arab Spring" style street protest.

"We learn from history that we do not learn from history."

Yeah. I'm just saying those same guys took up arms in self defence once Assad started firing into the streets, so to speak. AQ and Daesh only hijacked it from them a year or so later.

Final Fantasy, Foreign Policy, and Bollywood. Helluva combo, that...

Some of them did, but not all of them, esp. among the organizers.

"We learn from history that we do not learn from history."

@Shinra So, in a weird manner...are we back to the whole Eastern Roman/Persian thing of the Sixth Century?

Instead of focusing on relatives that divide us, maybe we should try to find the absolutes that tie us.

Explain how you mean. My history fu isn't as good as some, past the 19th century.

And it increased the more brutal Assad got. Being moderate doesn't mean these guys were pacifists.

Final Fantasy, Foreign Policy, and Bollywood. Helluva combo, that...

In short, the Middle East was contested between Sassanid Persia and Byzantium with the Romans in posession of Western Syria and a bit more while Persia had Eastern Syria and total control of Iraq.

Edit: Forgot to mention that Russia made a big deal of being the Third Rome after the fall of Constantinople.

edited 5th Feb '16 6:03:00 PM by raziel365

Instead of focusing on relatives that divide us, maybe we should try to find the absolutes that tie us.

Depends on the final settlement. Assad's regime, even if it reconquers everything, simply can no longer govern. Russia and Iran have to fix that in one way or another. How they do so will determine what next (and which one of the two gets lead in the project).

If its the Russians, then I can see the scenario you lay out in the sense that Russia has western Syria and Iran has Iraq (with the rest of Syria going to the Kurds and their allies). Otherwise...no idea.

Final Fantasy, Foreign Policy, and Bollywood. Helluva combo, that...

Yup, pretty much, although they might attempt to make Syria a federal/confederal country so as to give the Kurds a degree of independence without angering Turkey (too much).

Instead of focusing on relatives that divide us, maybe we should try to find the absolutes that tie us.

@raziel: I'd pick the conflicts between the Ottoman Empire and the Russian Empire in the 19th century as a closer reference (at least, considering an article I read that made a few comparisons between Erdogan and Putin).

edited 5th Feb '16 6:43:00 PM by Quag15

Regarding Kurdistan, we're definitely gonna go for a solution that pisses off Turkey the most there. That's what you get when you antagonise chest-puffing strongmen and aren't important enough for them to still want to cooperate with you in the long-term.

edited 5th Feb '16 6:52:54 PM by KnitTie

That's true given that Russia finally got to annex Crimea.

I doubt Putin would like more conflict there as much as he would love to annoy Turkey; he would most likely get the country back on its feel ASAP to have an incentive for the migrants to return, and therefore, have some leverage with the EU and probably get rid of their economic sanctions.

Instead of focusing on relatives that divide us, maybe we should try to find the absolutes that tie us.