Trump Can’t Wing it on Syria

Out of the many challenges that the new US administration faces in its formative days, the ongoing war in Syria is the thorniest. Ironically, this topic is muted from on all the Sunday talk shows. Neither President Trump, nor Secretaries Tillerson or Mattis nor anyone else has offered any clues on this front. Notwithstanding, Syria will be the one crisis that tests the mettle of the new President in asserting America’s peace stand from a position of strength. For Syria includes all the ingredients of an international quagmire soaked in the stained waters of human rights’ abuses, use of chemical weapons, Radical Islamic Terrorism, tyrannical rule, and much more. In short, a best movie for the horror category, with additional nominations for drama, action, and foreign film. At this theater of operations, the actors do not trade jibes or liberal jokes, but rather bullets and large doses of the nerve agent sarin.

ISIL is running amok in Syria’s country side and in the suburbs of the larger cities, still undefeated and unchecked. Iran and its proxy militias, from Hezbollah of Lebanon to the Hazaras of Afghanistan, are ruling supreme. Russia, after its air force leveled Aleppo to the dimensions of a huge football stadium, is playing match maker between warring factions in a sham peace forum that lacks both effectiveness and credibility. Turkey is at the apex of confusion, lost between fighting ISIL halfheartedly and eliminating the Kurds with full vindictiveness. Finally, the Syrian regime is calmly reaping the benefits of other people’s toils, tears and blood in the hope of clinging to the vestige of its former power, albeit in the transmuted role of an Iranian puppet or a Russian stooge. Did we miss anyone? Ah yes, the US.

The pathetic and cynically minimalist diplomacy of the Obama administration is over, but the new plan is not yet in. Too early would argue some, too late would retort others who have seen Syria overtaken by Iranian influence, Russian occupation, and Turkish border infiltration, whilst ISIL remains bruised but not yet out. The new administration has few months at best, to decide how to go about reinstating much needed stability to the Middle East, restoring its seriously wounded prestige as a world power, and imposing –through effective diplomacy backed by gunships- a peace settlement between the various protagonists.

Keeping Assad in power, as an option, would alienate the opposition groups and the Sunni Arab nations whose role in and endorsement of, the mortal combat against ISIL is primordial to the US. This scenario would also embolden Iran and provide Russia with new opportunities to attract tyrants who feel secure in its newly crafted zone of unchecked influence. But equally, working for the removal of Assad without a viable replacement plan is another disastrous outcome, much like the Libyan and Yemeni failed experiments.

The Trump administration, working with its European allies, Turkey (which I think is till part of NATO) and the Sunni Arab nations (Egypt, Saudi, UAE, Jordan) should chart a new course. Starting with the creation of safe zones along the borders of Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey. Safe zones would necessarily mean no-fly-zones that must be implemented vigorously except for permitted strikes against ISIL. Then, moving refugees back into such encampments –from both within and outside Syria- would be the decent thing to do as well as the right thing. This should be followed by the formation of a regular army –from refugees’ able men and women- to face up to ISIL, and to counter-weigh the regime and its cronies. Russia would act on behalf of the regime and the US (and its allies) on behalf of a non-radicalized, but militarized opposition to secure a compromise. A compromise would undoubtedly include a federated government, maximum autonomy to provinces divided (inevitably) along sectarian lines, the reduction of presidential powers and the installation of an all-inclusive government.

Out of the many challenges that the new US administration faces in its formative days, the ongoing war in Syria is the thorniest. Ironically, this topic is muted from on all the Sunday talk shows. Neither President Trump, nor Secretaries Tillerson or Mattis nor anyone else has offered any clues on this front. Notwithstanding, Syria will be the one crisis that tests the mettle of the new President in asserting America’s peace stand from a position of strength. For Syria includes all the ingredients of an international quagmire soaked in the stained waters of human rights’ abuses, use of chemical weapons, Radical Islamic Terrorism, tyrannical rule, and much more. In short, a best movie for the horror category, with additional nominations for drama, action, and foreign film. At this theater of operations, the actors do not trade jibes or liberal jokes, but rather bullets and large doses of the nerve agent sarin.

ISIL is running amok in Syria’s country side and in the suburbs of the larger cities, still undefeated and unchecked. Iran and its proxy militias, from Hezbollah of Lebanon to the Hazaras of Afghanistan, are ruling supreme. Russia, after its air force leveled Aleppo to the dimensions of a huge football stadium, is playing match maker between warring factions in a sham peace forum that lacks both effectiveness and credibility. Turkey is at the apex of confusion, lost between fighting ISIL halfheartedly and eliminating the Kurds with full vindictiveness. Finally, the Syrian regime is calmly reaping the benefits of other people’s toils, tears and blood in the hope of clinging to the vestige of its former power, albeit in the transmuted role of an Iranian puppet or a Russian stooge. Did we miss anyone? Ah yes, the US.

The pathetic and cynically minimalist diplomacy of the Obama administration is over, but the new plan is not yet in. Too early would argue some, too late would retort others who have seen Syria overtaken by Iranian influence, Russian occupation, and Turkish border infiltration, whilst ISIL remains bruised but not yet out. The new administration has few months at best, to decide how to go about reinstating much needed stability to the Middle East, restoring its seriously wounded prestige as a world power, and imposing –through effective diplomacy backed by gunships- a peace settlement between the various protagonists.

Keeping Assad in power, as an option, would alienate the opposition groups and the Sunni Arab nations whose role in and endorsement of, the mortal combat against ISIL is primordial to the US. This scenario would also embolden Iran and provide Russia with new opportunities to attract tyrants who feel secure in its newly crafted zone of unchecked influence. But equally, working for the removal of Assad without a viable replacement plan is another disastrous outcome, much like the Libyan and Yemeni failed experiments.

The Trump administration, working with its European allies, Turkey (which I think is till part of NATO) and the Sunni Arab nations (Egypt, Saudi, UAE, Jordan) should chart a new course. Starting with the creation of safe zones along the borders of Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey. Safe zones would necessarily mean no-fly-zones that must be implemented vigorously except for permitted strikes against ISIL. Then, moving refugees back into such encampments –from both within and outside Syria- would be the decent thing to do as well as the right thing. This should be followed by the formation of a regular army –from refugees’ able men and women- to face up to ISIL, and to counter-weigh the regime and its cronies. Russia would act on behalf of the regime and the US (and its allies) on behalf of a non-radicalized, but militarized opposition to secure a compromise. A compromise would undoubtedly include a federated government, maximum autonomy to provinces divided (inevitably) along sectarian lines, the reduction of presidential powers and the installation of an all-inclusive government. The army would not be disbanded and should remain under the command of a Alawi officer, working closely with a war council that shares the command and includes generals from all sects. Assad would depart to Moscow, Tehran or Cuba, and Syria would gradually find its way back to pseudo-normalcy in few years.

This is one scenario, not the best, not the worst. Just one among many. What is certain is that watching from afar and hoping for the disappearance of the Syrian crisis or the voluntary restraint of the United States’ avowed enemies, is not an option, under any scenario. More importantly not under a ‘Make America Great Again’ scenario.