Mikhail Barabanov, National Interest: Why Russia Needs an Exit Strategy in Syria
A Russia defense expert analyzes the Syria conflict.
Russia's intervention in Syria is the most remarkable military and political campaign of Putin's era, the first post-Soviet substantial military foray beyond the borders of the former USSR. For historical purposes, Russia's intervention in Syria, more than anything else, marks its return to the global arena as a player with whom other powers--led as they are by the United States--must contend, albeit reluctantly.
Clearly, the decision to dispatch a Russian military contingent to Syria was a very risky step in military, foreign policy, and domestic policy terms. The military intent whereby the operation would be limited solely to aerial bombardment and support of an ally fighting on the ground appears reasonable and moderate; however, one might recall that, in the early days in Vietnam, the Americans pursued a similar course, and look how things turned out. Internationally, Russia is plunging headfirst into the boiling cauldron of Middle East politics, complete with endless contradictory relations and links, and, by doing so, risks multiplying the ranks of its foes.
WNU Editor: This is a good military analysis by Mikhail Barabanov .... and it deserves to be read in its entirety. What's my take. Since the Russian intervention in Syria began .... I have talked to my Russian friends, family, and former/current employees in the Russian FO .... and while most (if not all) Russians are worried about escalation and casualties .... no one wants to discuss, debate, to think about, or even answer the question on what is Russia's exit strategy. I understand this sentiment .... the perception is that by discussing an exit strategy would only mean an acceptance of defeat .... and it would lower morale among Russian soldiers in the war-zone if they start to believe that this incursion is only a temporary measure, followed by a retreat. But a discussion needs to start now (if not in public at least in private) .... discussing these topics helps to formulate strategies and policies for the long term, and Russia will be needing it when the true costs and duration of this involvement starts to sink in. But for the moment ... unfortunately .... there is no exit strategy or discussion of an exit strategy in every segment of Russian society .... especially in the Russian President's office.
20 comments:
It is hard to have an exit strategy when faced with this:
http://m.truthdig.com/report/item/why_the_us_owns_the_rise_of_islamic_state_and_the_syria_disaster_20151008
http://sputniknews.com/politics/20151011/1028359194/syrian-army-liberates-villages-hama-province.html
I just don't see this as anything other than a zero sum situation for the Russo-Syrian-Iran
alliance. It is hard to believe that anyone in Moscow can be entertaining thoughts of negotiating a way out of this. It's a fight to the death that will be felt by the entire planet
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-10-11/moscow-demands-britain-explain-green-light-shoot-down-russian-jets
More craziness.
WNU Editor,
The Russians don't need an "Exit Strategy" for Syria, as they will be there for decades. Unlike the U.S., the Russians have capable local forces on the ground, doing the "heavy lifting", and they will be asked to remain, to prevent future Neocon/R2P/Saudi Games.
Yup.
One quibble - the Russians are more likely expecting a stalemated Syrian rebellion to start in-fighting, rather than suing for talks.
Phillip,
There have already been half a dozen local truces worked out between the actual LPG's and the SAA forces, now that Russia is involved.
The goal is to divide and conquer , personally I think the situation in the ground is not going to change for a while. Religious fanatics that has been killing people for the last 700 years are not going to change because super powers like Russia or the United States are dropping the hammer on them. A Religious reform may be needed for the islam. Kind like the Catholic Church did later in the fourting century it become very much dangerous. When revolutionary new ideas took over western Europe (Read : history of city of Munster Germany .you like reading ......some characters are amissing.
Mr Farquharson, that doesn't mean there won't be infighting among he rebels. Especially if the LPGs see the their truces with the SAA as an opportunity to gain position by attacking other rebel units.
Phillip,
LPG's are local protection groups. They arn't interested in toppling Assad, they formed to protect their towns and neighbourhoods from the jihadi headchoppers.
Some of them are FSA.
The Russian Plan for the rest of the FSA and jihadist headchoppers is to kill them.
While the jihadi groups have a long history of betraying each other and Klingon each other, that does not really factor into the Russian Plan.
BTW, by the time you remove the YPG, the foreign jihadists and all 4 or 5 members of the U.S. "vetted" Fee Syrian Army, the Syrian Jihadists amount to less than 0.004% of the Syrian Population.
Is R2P a neocon thing?
Samantha Powerful does not strike me as a neocon.
Perhaps Crass Sunstein is a neocon.
You can never tell with these things.
Anzino,
Samantha is married to Robert Kagan, of PNAC fame,
So yeah, RP2 is a Neocon thing.
"Samantha Power"
"On July 4, 2008, Power married law professor Cass Sunstein, whom she met while working on the Obama campaign"
"Samantha Power is considered to be a key figure within the Obama administration in persuading the president to intervene militarily in Libya.[44] Power argues that America has a moral obligation to examine all tools in the toolbox (diplomatic, economic, political, and military) to respond to mass atrocity, and she has argued that there may be circumstances in which military intervention may be appropriate to prevent genocides.[citation needed] Within the White House, Power strongly pressed for U.S. intervention on humanitarian grounds."
There is a reason why I was opposed to going into Sudan due to Darfur.
I don't care how much George Clooney, a liberal/leftists, in good standing complains.
As soon as we go in all the usual suspects (you included) will demand timetables, exit strategy, declaim atrocities etc. Saw this movie in Somalia. Why would we want a repeat?
Then to top it off, people like yourself will be busy creating little Khartoums on the Great Plains just like you created little Mogadishus.
I thought it was Nuland who was married to Kagan. Her of the infamous Maidan cookies.
You got it.
Like Canada's "peace enforcement" mission in Somalia which resulted in the disbanding of our airborne regiment. Typical Canadian foolishness; Send the most aggressive and ethnically homogenous force you have to a hostile territory full of an equally vicious ethnically homogenous group and expect to "make peace".
After sh@@ hits the fan, punish said force for doing what they were trained and organized to do. After that, then turn around and import enemy "refugees".
I'd wager we're right up there with Clooney the Douche, MATTER DAMON!!! et al when it comes to promoting such foolishness.
That being said, helping the carnage along for whatever interests are served (certainly not my working class Canadian ones) makes my home town's Little Mogadishu feel like just desserts.
Gong show that it is.
And let's not even get into Canada in Afghanistan.
helping to provide health care to people who are generally trying to make a civilized go of it in their home country is certainly more attractive to me, but hardly feasible in most cases. I still think there's a positive in helping the good of the good and bad in everything.
Post a Comment