Syria: are there any realistic alternatives other than a military attack or doing nothing?

[pnwmom]

Can serious pressure be brought to bear in some other achievable way? (Given the Russian intransigence in the U.N.)

I don't know the answer -- I'm asking.

[Scootaloo]

1. Depends on what outcome you want to see. n/t

[leftstreet]

2. What are some of the ideas the WH is considering?

[rug]

3. Yes, all the countries that are supplying weapons and chemicals can just stop.

[pnwmom]

7. That isn't realistic or achievable. We don't control all those countries. n/t

[rug]

8. It's a lot more realistic and achievable than tossing a match in a barrel of oil.

Do you not think the government knows where these weapons are coming from? Do you think it can not through international bodies organize an embargo?

[pnwmom]

12. I'm asking for realistic ALTERNATIVES to an attack or doing nothing.

Isn't there something in between we could actually do? And, no, controlling every other country, including Russia, China, and North Korea, is something we definitely can't do.

[rug]

19. You got one.

I realize that the BOG is listed as your favorite group but there are alternatives and there are different realities out there.

Russia, China and the U.S. have a lot in common when it comes to the munitions industry. They, along with these regular G8 and G20 summits can do a lot about embargoing rogue states.

Assuming, of course, they want to do something about.

Meanwhile, framing the issue as do nothing or attack is dishonest bullshit. Designed, I suspect, to support a preordained conclusion.

[pnwmom]

33. I'm NOT framing the issue as do nothing or attack. I'm ASKING what the ALTERNATIVES are

because I do not know.

And you obviously don't either, since you somehow think Russia wants to work with us on this problem.

[rug]

34. If the US and the USSR can sign a SALT treaty, Obama and Putin can reach a deal on arms to Syria.

[Arctic Dave]

30. The US is the largest supplier of weapons to the world.

Just stopping that would have huge impact.

[polly7]

4. ......

President Obama has no United Nations approval for intervention. (In February a massive bombing attack in Damascus left 100 dead and 250 wounded; in all likelihood the work of Islamic terrorists. The United States blocked a Russian resolution condemning the attack from moving through the UN Security Council)

http://williamblum.org/aer/read/120

[lumpy]

11. It appears all diplomatic and back and forth efforts have been exhausted.

No one can come up with an answer, nothing left. What will be will be. If there is to be attacks
against Syria I hope it will be by limited, surgical,targeted, and no troops on the grounds.

[polly7]

24. No, it doesn't 'appear' that way at all. Diplomatic efforts were never in the cards. PERIOD.

By Damien McElroy and agencies9:04AM BST 06 May 2013

"According to the testimonies we have gathered, the rebels have used chemical weapons, making use of sarin gas," del Ponte, a former war crimes prosecutor, said in an interview with Swiss radio late on Sunday.
"We still have to deepen our investigation, verify and confirm (the findings) through new witness testimony, but according to what we have established so far, it is at the moment opponents of the regime who are using sarin gas," she added.
She stressed that the UN commission of inquiry on Syria, which she is a part of, had far from finished its investigation.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/10039672/UN-accuses-Syrian-rebels-of-chemical-weapons-use.html

[Skidmore]

5. I'll second your question.

I don't think there are any easy answers for Syria. My sense is that the use of these weapons cannot be ignored. I know that is not a popular consensus right now on DU, but I just can't get on board the "too bad, it's not our problem" bus. It is humanity's problem and shame.

I'm hoping that this meeting with Putin may bear some fruit, or at the very least, slow things down. It likely will not but waiting to see some news from that.

I don't know. All sides of this feel wrong right now. Perhaps it is because nothing new has been introduced into consideration in the public discourse as yet.

[lumpy]

13. Thoughtful post.

[Posteritatis]

22. It has a strong feel of "need to find the least awful choice." (nt)

[MADem]

6. Persuade Putin to allow al Assad to go into exile in Russia...

Let Syria implement a Yemen Solution.

Oh, wait...that's been tried. No luck. Putin won't budge.

Convince Putin to let UN peacekeepers go in.

Nope...he won't do that, either.


Putin is a real dog in the manger, here.

[Savannahmann]

9. Yes, and it begins at the UN.

I know, Russian obstruction. But the Russians will not obstruct if you make a solid case and a little sanction. Cut off trade, end the oil trade with Syria, and make the fine the loss of the ship plus the cargo for anyone who takes it. Then the sale of that oil, the proceeds go to funding the sanctions. It pays for itself with a couple tankers.

Don't demand Assad goes, demand that he surrender the weapons to the UN. Stop talking about bombing or limited military strikes. Get the Russians on board with incontrovertible facts. They aren't completely unreasonable, and if you are asking a little, and giving a lot, they will go along.

Even if you go that route and fail, you are unable to get the Russians on board, then go to NATO, and see if we can pull another Kosovo resolution. Spend a month or two negotiating. UN weapons inspectors come in and eliminate or remove for safe disposal all weapons, or the sanctions stay on. Turkey is part of NATO, and they could provide bases if nothing else for our ships/planes. That is something that I think the people would get behind. A limited objective, and a reasonable response. Instead we went past Go, and we landed straight on bomb the crap out of them. Nobody is going to be behind that.

[pnwmom]

15. Thank you for the first direct answer to my question. It seemed to me that there had to be

more alternatives than I've been hearing.

[Savannahmann]

20. As long as you are looking for them, there are always alternatives.

Unfortunately, nobody in power is looking for them.

[reformist2]

21. Exactly. Russia can exert influence on Syria. So we should be pressuring Russia.

And all this can be done with deliberations and deal-making. Look ma, no bombs!

[randome]

25. Drought has been one of the leading causes of the rebellion.

I'm not sure that further impoverishing Syria will help.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[Savannahmann]

29. The sanctions are if Assad does not comply with the UN requirements

If he refuses to allow weapons inspectors to remove/destroy the CW safely, then the sanctions come into play. Work with him, because none of the rebel groups are especially wonderful in their makeup. He is bad, the reported affiliations of the rebels is even worse. Don't you think that the world would get behind a measured proportional response?

[randome]

35. I would hope so. And that's what I would prefer.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[Holly_Hobby]

10. Seize Assad's assets. Load up our naval carriers over there with Syrians

who want to come here. Use said assets to help them transition.

(I realize this is unrealistic, but I'm completely anti-war and totally compassionate)

[pnwmom]

14. I don't know. Maybe his assets could be seized -- depending on where they are. n/t

[David__77]

16. Withdraw support to the insurgents.

Support Geneva II.

[pnwmom]

17. What is Geneva II?

[David__77]

18. The US/Russian-proposed peace talks.

The ones that the insurgents have refused to attend because they think that the West would impost regime change: http://www.almanar.com.lb/english/adetails.php?eid=100929&cid=23&fromval=1

The Syrian government stated that it would unconditionally attend and get the ball rolling.

[bemildred]

23. A billion dollars of food and medicine would go a long way, look good too. nt

[actslikeacarrot]

26. I was going to say this...

...instead of dropping bombs, drop food/supplies/medicine. The people get some much needed relief, we look good to all sides, and best of all we can say that we aren't choosing sides in this Civil War.

[bemildred]

27. Yeah, like it's some sort of mystery. This whole civil war got started with food shortages. nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

28. How "realistic" is a military attack? How many people will it kill?

Will it inflame the situation, or calm it?

[pnwmom]

32. I didn't say attacking was realistic. I just asked for realistic ALTERNATIVES. n/t

[Scootaloo]

36. And you still haven't stated what outcome you want to see

There are a LOT of different things that could be done, but it all depends on what the goal is.

[pnwmom]

37. I personally don't want any of this.

But assuming Syria is proven to have used the chemical weapons, should we follow Obama's plan to attack, should we do nothing -- OR are there other alternatives? What are they?

[Scootaloo]

38. Okay, let's try this again

You want some sort of action taken with regard to Syria, some option between "Blow up Syrians" and "pretend nothing happened." Got it. The thing is, there needs to be a goal, a desired outcome. What you want whatever action to accomplish. If you want to topple Assad, that's going to be a different alternative action from securing weapon sites, which is a different action than drawing a halt to the civil war, which is different from helping the Syrian people first and foremost, etc.

[DLnyc]

31. Serious peace talks, where the US twists Israel's arm and Russia clamps down on Assad,

would be a realistic alternative, if AIPAC and US neo-cons in general could be given a short time-out in the corner.

Russia at this point would probably be happy to sacrifice Assad and his chemical baggage in exchange for continued influence in a political settlement in Syria.

The Israeli rightwing government can swallow a two-state solution if, and only if, they have the political cover of saying that the Americans gave them no choice.

But the international coalition of willing arms dealers would have a shit-fit.

[Celebrandil]

39. One cannot make Russia change her mind.

Russia has seen her (former) foe NATO grow stronger and stronger, has seen new American military bases popping up all around her borders and her own alliances collapse. Even if Russia knows that the Syrian regime is corrupt, instability might cause changes that Russia views as far worse. In a card game, you might not like to throw a Queen in the hope to get a King or Ace. In that sense her actions are logical. What Americans might view as a moral obligation to act, Russians see as a lame excuse to dominate yet another country in their back yard.