[The piece was published two days before the delivery of Obama's
televised speech.
But that has hardly any bearing on its content as it had rather
accurately anticipated the contours of the speech.

As an aside, it may not be just incidental that the Obama's subject
speech makes not mention of Iran - the main backer of the Assad
regime, either in a positive or in a negative way. Maybe possibilities
are open ended.]

http://www.vox.com/authors/max-fisher/rss

Vox: All Posts by Max Fisher
Obama's new ISIS strategy is good news for Assad, and he knows it
Monday, September 08, 2014 5:30 PM

President Obama made clearer than ever, in an interview with Meet the
Press on Sunday, that the United States will become more involved in
Syria in response to the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria
(ISIS, also known as ISIL), but that this response will not target
Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad and his regime -- and may in fact help
him.

"We've got to have a more sustainable strategy, which means the boots
on the ground [in Iraq] have to be Iraqi," Obama said of his plan to
defeat ISIS in Iraq by encouraging the Iraqi government and military
to fight them. "And in Syria, the boots on the ground have to be
Syrian."

Obama explained that he envisions moderate Sunni rebel groups
challenging ISIS directly for control of Syrian territory, with
support from the United States. But that also means somehow steering
the Assad regime to shift its military focus from targeting those
moderate rebels, as it currently is, to targeting ISIS instead. It's
not clear how this would be possible unless the US, in its sponsorship
of Syrian rebels, encouraged them to ease back on Assad and fight ISIS
instead.

"Obama tacit offer for assad: go after ISIS and we'll leave you alone"

"In terms of controlling territory, we're going to have to develop a
moderate Sunni opposition that can control territory and that we can
work with," Obama said. "We need to put more resources into the
moderate opposition in part because, unless we have people we can work
with who are Sunni in these Sunni regions, then we're going to
continue to have these problems."

Syria's civil war is a three-way conflict between the Syrian
government, ISIS, and more moderate rebels. (Al-Qaeda's branch in
Syria, Jabhat al-Nusra, might be considered a fourth party to the
war.) The moderate rebels are the weakest party, in part because both
Assad and ISIS appear to have a tacit deal to target those rebels
first before fully fighting one another. Obama acknowledged this:
"They have been on the defensive, not just from ISIL, but also from
the Assad regime."

Bashar al-Assad (Sasha Mordovets/Getty Images)

"Right now in Syria, you've got a choice, in the minds of a lotta
people, between radical Sunni extremists or Assad," Obama said,
acknowledging that the moderate rebels' weakness makes them a not
viable choice for Syrians. The ugly truth is that, while Syrian Sunnis
are not exactly rushing into ISIS's embrace, nor are they rising up
against it. There is no anti-ISIS rebellion, in the same way that
there is an anti-Assad. Obama's implication was that he wants to offer
Syrians a third choice: moderate Syrian rebels.

At this point, though, all of the US-supplied kalashnikovs and mortar
rounds in the world are probably not going to be enough to help
Syria's moderate rebels take on both the Assad regime and ISIS at the
same time, much less seize all that ISIS-held territory in eastern
Syria. The possibility of US airstrikes against ISIS territory in
Syria would make a difference, but far from a decisive one.

""And in Syria, the boots on the ground have to be Syrian""

The calculus of the war has to change, and that appears to mean that
the United States will now form its own unspoken and unacknowledged
agreement with the Assad regime: let's put aside our differences, for
now, and cooperate against ISIS, a mutual enemy we both hate more than
each other. In its basic contours, it is almost identical to the tacit
deal that the Assad regime made with ISIS against the moderate rebels.

Obama all but acknowledged this in his interview. "Our attitude
towards Assad continues to be that you know, through his actions,
through using chemical weapons on his own people, dropping barrel
bombs that killed innocent children that he has foregone legitimacy,"
Obama said. "But when it comes to our policy and the coalition that
we're putting together, our focus specifically is on ISIL. It's
narrowly on ISIL."

Obama has been clear that the US cannot be seen as supporting Assad,
even tacitly, and that Assad is a huge part of the problem that
allowed ISIS to form in the first place. But he also made clear on
Sunday that America's priorities in the region are changing to focus
on ISIS rather than Assad, and even encouraging Assad to see his goals
as in line with America's.
-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to