Analysis - Is Syria now a direct threat to the U.S.?

[dipsydoodle]

(Reuters) - Over the last two weeks, Obama administration officials have signalled - sometimes intentionally, sometimes not - that a worst-case scenario is emerging in Syria.

Peace talks are at a virtual standstill. An emboldened President Bashar al-Assad has missed two deadlines to turn over his deadliest chemical weapons. And radical extremists who have fought in Syria are carrying out attacks in Egypt and allegedly aspire to strike the United States as well.

Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper told members of Congress last week that Jabhat al-Nusra, an al-Qaeda aligned group in Syria, "does have aspirations for attacks on the homeland." American and Egyptian officials expressed alarm this week at signs that Egyptians who fought in Syria have returned home to mount an insurgency.

Critics of Obama administration policy in Syria argue that none of this should come as a surprise. For years, they have predicted that Assad and his Iranian and Russian backers would fight tenaciously; militants would flock to Syria; and the region would be destabilized by refugee flows, rising sectarianism and radicalized fighters returning home.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/02/08/uk-syria-us-analysis-idUKBREA161NI20140208

[pampango]

1. "Assad sees no real pressure, certainly not from Iran and probably not from Russia."

At a private meeting with members of Congress at the Munich Security Conference last week, Secretary of State John Kerry said that "the al-Qaeda threat is real, it is getting out of hand," Republican U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham later told reporters. "He openly talked about supporting arming the rebels. He openly talked about forming a coalition against al-Qaeda because it's a direct threat.

Noah Bonsey, a Beirut-based Senior Analyst for the International Crisis Group, called Kerry's reported statements "an acknowledgement of the facts." On the rebel side of the conflict, al-Qaeda aligned militants have badly damaged the international reputation of the Syrian opposition. On the government side, Assad and his backers in Iran and Russia are increasingly confident.

"Geneva made abundantly clear that the regime is not prepared to compromise on anything at all, no matter how small," Bonsey said in a telephone interview, referring to the peace talks. "They believe themselves to be winning and they perceive themselves as seeing no real pressure, certainly not from Iran and probably not from Russia."

Public opinion polls in the United States continue to show sweeping opposition to greater American involvement, including arming more moderate rebels. Experts say only one scenario could change Washington's stance: Syria-based militants somehow strike the American homeland. Until that occurs, no level of carnage in Syria, Egypt or the Middle East is likely to change Washington's political calculus.

The "probably not from Russia" is the only thing that keeps Assad awake at night. As long as Putin sticks with Assad, he will still be ruling Syria (at least most of whatever is left of it) ten years from now.

There was a post here a few days ago that Russia was not adequately resupplying Assad's jets, bombs and missiles. That is why his troops have been dropping improvised "barrel bombs" from helicopters recently. Assad's main military advantages are heavy weapons like tanks and big artillery and aircraft with their bombs and missiles. He needs Russia to keep supplying them.