'Plan B' and the Bankruptcy of US Syria Policy

[Jefferson23]

3/2/2016

The 'Plan B' episode shows another moment of failed US policymaking on the Syrian crisis, revealing a familiar pattern of deep division
by
Gareth Porter

US Secretary of State John Kerry provoked widespread speculation when he referred in testimony before the Senate foreign relations committee last week to “significant discussions” within US President Barack Obama's administration about a “Plan B” in Syria. The speculation was further stoked by a “senior official” who told CBS News that options under consideration included "'military-like' measures that would make it harder for the regime and its allies to continue their assault on civilians and US-backed rebels.”

But “Plan B” is more complicated than that. A report by CNN’s Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr on 26 February leaves little room for doubt that the administration’s cupboard of policy options is actually bare. An unnamed “senior US official” at the Pentagon admitted that “Plan B” is actually “more an idea than a specific course of action”. In other words, the administration’s national security policymakers believe something more should be done in Syria, but they are not at all clear what could be done now.

The official said three options were under discussion, none of which is even close to being realistic in the present situation: an increase in US Special Forces on the ground, an increase in arms assistance to fighters opposing Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, and a no-fly zone.

The option of adding more Special Forces is only relevant to a counter-terrorism strategy aimed at the Islamic State (IS) group, not at preventing the further weakening of anti-Assad forces. Special Forces are now in Syria to help the one reliable ally against IS – the Kurdish YPG. Sending them into provinces to fight the Syrian army or Hezbollah wouId be an overreach of stunning proportions.

remainder: http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/03/02/plan-b-and-bankruptcy-us-syria-policy

[leveymg]

1. To the neocons, process (continued civil war) is more important than outcome -

Divided Syria with the Shiia dominated govt and the Russians continuing to hold Damascus and most of the coastal cities. Kerry is outcome oriented - he wants a cease fire and a settlement by the end of the summer.

[bemildred]

2. I think Kerry was just throwing a bone to the War Party.

That dipshit al Jubeir is throwing around nuclear threats now.

[karynnj]

3. In context, the mention of plan B was in reaction to Corker stating in the premise of a question

that Obama had no plan B. In reality, with even Kerry saying the resolution and the political path is a long shot, there is no way that the Obama administration would NOT be looking at other options. This then was conflated with a Kerry comment that this really is a last chance and that if it fails, there may be no way to keep the country whole. This was stated as explanation of why they worked so hard on what is really a long shot.

In fact, after the Iran deal, when Kerry started to work with the other countries to get the resolution, then the cessation of hostility, he admitted that the chances of success were very low, but the situation demanded trying. Every step - getting the resolution and getting even a cessation of hostilities as been very very tough and against expectations -- yet, the distance still to go to get out of the mess is far far longer than getting these two non negligible, but small compared to what needs to be done, accomplishments.

As bad as Assad is, I suspect that the US has the tougher job keeping Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the rebels in line.

[bemildred]

4. Thanks, I did not look into it, it just smelled of hyperbole, which is rampant these days.

People so eager to throw yet one more conniption.

The question (in Syria) has always been whether Putin is a megalomaniac or merely the usual corrupt-but-living-in-the-real world autocrat.

If he plays ball, between us we have a good shot to make it work, and you are correct about where the trouble will come from.

If he doesn't play ball, it won't happen.

Erdogan will get a war in the Caucasus if he jumps in, and the Sauds likely will get to meet the Shi'ia militias in Iraq. Not going to be pretty. Edit: I think Putin wants to play the peacemaker here, and we should let him, not much to lose anyway.

Kerry has fully redeemed himself in my eyes. That's a diplomat.

[bemildred]

5. The thing is, IF Russia and the US cooperated to make these guys behave,

EVERYBODY else, UN, EU,China, India, Latin America, is going to back us.

[karynnj]

6. Exactly -- and why they got the UN resolution, once they got the agreements needed

The question I still have is whether, even if the US and Russia were 100% sincere, whether these troublesome clients would behave. Turkey seems completely out of control. Though not mentioned in this article, the rebels seem absolutely furious with Kerry in particular and the US in general. Obviously, they feel betrayed because they were promised support and power that they are completely unlikely to get. A scary thing is if they blow things up because they assume that a new President would give them more.

I just wish we had a choice who really had the same values as Obama on foreign policy who was leading the polls. I assume that Bernie would continue the process we are in -- and as a bonus -- will NOT see regime change as a solution anywhere.

[bemildred]

7. It looks somewhat existential for Erdogan and the Sauds, that's the problem.

I can't really add to what you say there. Not enough info. But I'm pretty sure Putin would not mind having Erdogan's head on his wall, if it was convenient, so I don't like it. He's not wedded to it, but he won't miss the chance. And the same with the Sauds. And they are both nuts. And we need them to not fall apart.

And I'm worried about that dam. Boy that will be a mess.

[bemildred]

8. This is going to be a wild election, nothing like it for 50 years.

And dirty dirty dirty. Bernie may win on that alone before it's over.

[Jefferson23]

13. My take on Porter's piece is that interactive Imperialism is complex. n/t

[bemildred]

14. Yah.

I was a little annoyed about the Plan B thing because I though it was hype, but Gareth is not wrong, Kerry is constrained in many ways by past mistakes made by others from what he might prefer to do. He is in the position of trying to clean up a mess and set things as right as may be done, working from within a divided and disfunctional government, and doing his best to push things in the right direction. And he's done a hell of a job, really, I'm surprised more people haven't called him Chamberlain or something. Probably they have.

But he has one thing going for him, everybody wants him to succeed, except at home, and a few other places. And I think we all better hope he does.

[Jefferson23]

15. Oh yea, it is a mess indeed and I want for him to succeed and hope he does..who comes next

after him may be someone I fear..a lot. I was relieved when Clinton left.

[bemildred]

16. I think by the time Ms Clinton gets in office she will be much constrained in what she can do.

For many reasons, so I am not too worried about her, though I would much prefer Bernie with a compliant Congress. Hah.

Trump is a worry though, yuuuuuge potential to make trouble.

[Jefferson23]

17. I don't want to find out what Trump would do. I hope you're right about Clinton. Bernie

will remain vocal if she wins the WH, she is going to be bothered by him with
people like me behind him. I would prefer Bernie too..so much to undue, he
would present a great kick start..hell like but a of good kind.

[bemildred]

18. I hope I'm right too. nt

[bemildred]

9. The Good And Bad Of Syria’s Ceasefire

Violence in Syria has decreased considerably in the last week, following an agreement by international powers to a cessation of hostilities in the country’s five year civil war.

“In general, the cessation has been holding,” Staffan de Mistura, the UN Secretary General’s Special Envoy to Syria, said Thursday. He told reporters in Geneva that violence had been “greatly reduced” and “success is not guaranteed but progress is visible.”

Syria’s civil war started in March 2011 after protests against the regime of Bashar al-Assad were suppressed with brutal force. Protesters picked up arms, regional and international powers backed the opposing sides, and radical Islamists infiltrated Syria, leaving over 250,000 people dead and the country in chaos. Many civilians were in dire need of a ceasefire, especially in parts of the country besieged by Assad’s army where locals are dealing with starvation.

http://thinkprogress.org/world/2016/03/03/3756373/syria-good-bad-ugly/

[bemildred]

10. How Russia used the war in Syria to reassert its global might

Russia’s game-changing intervention in Syria has been a showcase for its stunningly advanced military. And all eyes are watching.

Little doubt remains now that U.S. foreign policy in Syria is failing spectacularly. It would have been less obvious even a few weeks ago. Back then, before Russia began its brutal bombing campaign in support of Syrian regime forces, President Barack Obama could still make an argument for his measured approach. In some ways, it was working: the Kurds, backed by Washington, were making progress against the delusional world-domination fantasies of the so-called Islamic State. The Assad regime was shrinking and increasingly desperate. Refugees fleeing regime-held areas were telling horror stories of a regime army desperate for conscripts. “If you could hold a gun and walk,” one refugee told Maclean’s last summer, “you were expected to fight.”

Russia’s entrance into the Syrian theatre has changed everything. Last week, Secretary of State John Kerry caused a stir in Washington policy circles after intimating that the U.S. was formulating a more aggressive “Plan B” to counter the Russians’ punishing offensive, which has helped regime forces rise again from the ashes of their near defeat. The plan was short on details but, according to one “senior official” speaking to CBS News, discussions included “military-like” dimensions, whatever that means.

But rather than set out a clear position, Plan B instead has only reinforced the perception that the U.S. administration has no clue about how to deal with Russia’s decisive involvement in Syria. A ceasefire deal hammered out last week was, most observers agree, merely a stopgap; it does nothing to turn the tide, nor does it appear to open the way for a negotiated settlement to the hostilities.

What it has done is show just how thoroughly Moscow is dictating events, from getting its way on which groups would be included in the ceasefire to setting the parameters of any talks that would follow. Russia, clearly, is now more than just winning in Syria. It has re-emerged as a major player on the world stage.

http://www.macleans.ca/news/world/how-russia-used-the-war-in-syria-to-reassert-its-global-might/

[bemildred]

11. Leaders of Russia, France, UK, Germany to Have Conference Call on Syria

MOSCOW (Sputnik) — Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Thursday that "there are such plans [indeed]".

UK Prime Minister David Cameron's spokeswoman, Helen Bower said that the leaders of the four countries will a have a conference call on the implementation of ceasefire regime in war-torn Syria.

"Our focus is that we hope that, by engaging with Russia and other countries, we can bring an end to the terrible suffering in Syria that has killed so many people and forced so many people from their homes, " Bower told reporters.

Cameron also confirmed the planned talks shortly after.

"We will discuss Syria with Chancellor [Angela] Merkel and President Putin on Friday," he said after a joint summit with French President Francois Hollande.

http://sputniknews.com/world/20160304/1035745644/conference-call-on-syria-due-on-friday.html

[bemildred]

12. Davutoğlu to visit Iran, discuss Syria, regional issues

Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu will pay an official visit to Iran Friday and Saturday to discuss bilateral ties and regional developments. In April 2015 President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan paid an official visit to Tehran and Davutoğlu's visit will be highest level visit between the two neighbors for almost a year. Syria and the different views to end the five-year civil war remain the biggest matter of concern for the two countries. Davutoğlu is expected to discuss the Syrian conflict and the implementation of the Russian and U.S.-brokered cease-fire that went into force in last week. After the removal of sanctions Iran has emerged as a new center of attraction for the world's largest economies as well as Turkish business that seeks to find new markets.

Because of this, economy is also expected to be a major item on Davutoğlu's agenda. Prior to Davutoğlu's visit, Union of Chambers and Commodity Exchanges of Turkey (TOBB) President Rıfat Hisarcıklıoğlu and his delegation visited Tehran to strengthen business ties. Underlining the importance of the Iranian market for Turkish business, Hisarcıklıoğlu said that Turkey should not lose Iran to its competitors and added, "During our fruitful visit Iran also expressed their willingness to increase cooperation."

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan recently said that if Russia had not seen the Assad regime as the means to hang on to power in the Mediterranean and if Iran had not adopted a sectarian foreign policy, the world would may not have witnessed the current situation in Syria. He said if Iran had not stood next to Assad with its sectarian-driven policies, war-torn Syria may not be in its current situation, where thousands of Iranian troops and several Shiite militia groups from Lebanon and Iraq are fighting alongside the regime.

http://www.dailysabah.com/diplomacy/2016/03/04/davutoglu-to-visit-iran-discuss-syria-regional-issues