The Wrongologist

What’s
Wrong Today:

During the early morning of June 5th, the Syrian army launched a surprise night attack
and overran the insurgency’s positions in Qusayr. Qusayr is only 6 miles from
the Lebanese border. Some of the insurgents managed to flee north but may have
trouble breaking through the cordon that the Syrian army has set up.

Moon of Alabama reports that the
insurgency’s supply line from Lebanon to Homs has been severed. Insurgency
positions in Homs may soon fall to the Syrian army. Freeing the insurgency-held
parts of Aleppo further north will be the next big target.

The Syrian
opposition made a fatal error. Out-gunned insurgents should never make a stand against
a better-armed government siege force equipped with artillery, tanks and
airplanes. Reinforcements came, some professing close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, but the Syrian
Army with its best troops and the urban warfare specialists, Hezbollah, prevailed.

Hezbollah’s
Deputy Chief Sheikh Naim Qassem stated on Wednesday:

The
Syrians are now preparing to move on Aleppo.  Up to 4,000 Hezbollah
fighters
moved north to Aleppo before fighting was complete in Qusayr. Aleppo, a
city of 2 million, is Syria’s commercial center and vital to the retention of
national integrity for Syria.

Events seem
to be breaking in the direction of the Syrian government over the past few
days. The Lebanon rebel supply route is closed for now. This corridor
was the transit point for weapons and
fighters from Lebanon. From Michael Collins:

Score 1
for Assad.

What will
the United States and NATO do if their hopes for Syria fail?  Rebuilding
relations with Assad is out of the question.

John
Kerry’s appointment as Secretary of State changed our direction on Syria. The US
and Russia announced on May 7 that they would try to bring representatives of
the Syrian government and its opponents together to
seek an end to a conflict. 

So instead
of sending weapons to the rebels to increase pressure on the Assad regime and
force it to the table, Kerry held out the threat of providing weapons in the
future as an inducement to make Assad negotiate. “Negotiate now, or we’ll send weapons
later” replaced the position that sending weapons now will lead to meaningful
negotiations later.

But that
strategy has blown up with the Assad regime’s success on the ground.

From Reuters:
Russian, US and UN officials meeting in Geneva on Wednesday failed to resolve
questions over proposed Syria peace talks, including who would take part.
Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov:

Score 2
for Assad.

As of
today, there is no date for the conference, but it is unlikely to occur before
July. In July, the US assumes the presidency of the Security Council. Samantha
Power, Mr. Obama’s new UN Representative, will replace Susan Rice at the UN.

Time to review
the bidding:

Let’s say
Assad eventually wins and the rebels escape to surrounding Arab countries
where the oil wealth of the Arab kings should provide them with a home, assuming the kings continue their legendary hospitality.

Assad can
hardly savor his victory, because Sunni sovereign and al Qaeda forces are
arrayed against him on all sides. The Sunnis and Shiites could drag this war out
for generations, which means they
might not be thinking quite as hard about New York City or Boston.

Here is
the line-up:

Pro-Assad:
Iran, Hezbollah, (both Shia) Russia

Anti-Assad:
Saudi Arabia, Turkey, UAE, Bahrain (all Sunni)

The
US has ties (or conflicts) on both sides: We supported the Shia in our foray
into Iraq and long ago, in Iran. We have been aligned with Sunnis in Saudi,
Kuwait, and the Gulf States. Al-Qaeda is Sunni, Egypt is predominantly Sunni.  

Saudi
and Qatar are backers of the Muslim Brotherhood, which has captured Egypt.

Why is the
US continuing to listen to these calls to get involved on the Sunni side? The
Shia do not pose a threat to America, they only pose a threat to Israel,
through Iran and Hezbollah.

So
choose your proxy war in the Middle East:

Syria, where the
outcome will determine the regional pecking order. Hezbollah’s success in Syria is a
blow to Saudi Arabia and Israel, which have supported Hezbollah’s political
opponents in Lebanon. The Syrian army’s gains are a setback to the Saudis,
Qataris and Turks, all of whom have backed the rebels with money and weapons.

Israel, where their fight with Hezbollah and
the Palestinians will be run by Iran and the US. Iran needs
Hezbollah as a proxy, or it will face direct consequences from Israel and the
US.

This means that all parties are likely to step back somewhat. They will adopt a
wait and see attitude, since everyone knows that intervention on the ground is
dicey, that no clear outcome can be predicted, or engineered quickly.

Is there an
opportunity we are missing by staying on the sidelines in Syria?

No.
The idea that we either look weak or are weakened if we don’t intervene is
agitprop peddled by America’s home-grown chicken hawks and the friends of Israel. Let’s
defend our homeland for a change. We should ignore the Chihuahuas barking at us
from the parking lot.

The Neo-Cons are
barking that we must send more arms quickly before radical rebels gain the
upper hand. But, the radicals have been in the lead from the first moments. It
was very clear at the very earliest part of this civil war when the
revolutionaries seized the city of Homs. They dynamited the local Christian
churches.

The thought
that overthrowing Assad will hurt Iran is embarrassingly optimistic. Iran would
just establish relations with any victorious Sunni government. After all, Iran
has close relations with Pakistan, another Sunni state.

Let’s
remember that supporting Sunni fighters against the Soviets gave us the
Taliban and al-Qaeda. Why would supporting their fellow travelers (and de facto
al-Qaeda themselves) in Syria give us anything better?

Here is your crib note: Assad is not our friend and the revolutionaries are our enemies.
Entering this mess on any side would show that we are again ignoring the Sunni-Shia
divide.