******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. *****************************************************************
Actually Lou, that would not be a safe assumption. The geopolitics are against any motion in Syria. That could only be settled by regional considerations. This was my report a month ago, http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/vijay-prashad-on-the-syrian-conflict- alqaeda-and-isis/article7206649.ece. Here is the final paragraph: "In a recent paper, Omar Dahi argues that when the 2011 uprising in Syria took to the gun, this became ³the main conduit by which Turkey and the Arab Gulf states ‹ under cover of the exiled Syrian opposition ‹ hijacked the movement inside Syria.² These outside powers continue to set the pace for the chaos in the country. In March 2012, the International Crisis Group warned that the entry of Gulf Arab influence would ³plunge the nation even deeper into a bloody civil war without prospects for a resolution in the foreseeable future, and almost certainly trigger counter-steps by regime allies, thus intensifying the budding proxy war.² This is precisely what has happened. To believe that greater influence and military support by Turkey and the Gulf Arab states as well as Iran would help bring peace in Syria is a cruel creed. The US training of 90 rebel fighters in Jordan is both ineffective and dangerous most of its previous fighters have joined up with one or the other al-Qaeda backed group. The appetite for a political solution is neither visible amongst the fighters nor amongst their backers. The only power in the region that seems to want calm ‹ for reasons having to do with the P5+1 nuclear deal is Iran. But trust between Iran and its Arab adversaries are at low ebb. It will take a great deal more than rhetoric to bring the regional powers to the table. Trust in the United Nations is also low. Despite the fact that the former UN envoy to Yemen, Jamal Benomar, was ready to announce a deal, Saudi Arabia began its bombing runs. Trust in the UN envoy to Syria, Steffan de Mistura, is at historic lows. Other ways shall have to be found. The message that Qatar, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the United States are unwilling to digest is that the conflict in Syria, as in Yemen, advantages al-Qaeda and ISIS. That is the cold-hearted reality.² Omar¹s paper is in the current issue of MERIP. It is unlikely that a regional solution will result in ³a cleaned up Baathist entity.² By all accounts, the Baathist grouping is long ago fragmented, having been reformed into a much more narrow clique over the past few years. A national unity government will have to include currents that are far outside Baathism. Warm regards, Vijay. On 6/25/15, 9:08 PM, "Louis Proyect" <l...@panix.com> wrote: >On 6/25/15 3:53 PM, Prashad, Vijay via Marxism wrote: >> These books reflect the general tenor of my own reporting from the >>region, > >One can safely assume that Vijay no longer believes that a regional >big-power peace conference is some sort of panacea. It is more likely >that a global thermonuclear Armageddon will take place before Russia and >its adversaries can cook up some compromise that will leave a cleaned up >Baathist entity in place. _________________________________________________________ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
