President Obama, on Tuesday in the Oval Office, had long argued that Russia’s military invention in Syria would backfire. Credit Doug Mills/The New York Times
Mark Landler, New York Times: What Quagmire? Even in Withdrawal, Russia Stays a Step Ahead
WASHINGTON — For five years, President Obama has steadfastly rejected the argument that the United States could intervene in Syria, alter the equation on the battlefield and avoid being sucked into a quagmire. Now, it appears that President Vladimir V. Putin has done exactly that.
The Russian leader’s announcement on Monday that he would withdraw the bulk of his forces from Syria not only caught the White House by surprise, it seemed to belie Mr. Obama’s regular warnings that Russia would be severely damaged by its military adventurism. And it reinforced the sense that Mr. Putin has managed to maintain the initiative in Syria against an American president who wants to keep the war at arm’s length.
The White House on Tuesday cautiously welcomed Russia’s latest move, even as it continued to criticize its intervention, and administration officials struggled to understand Mr. Putin’s motives for acting now.
Read more ....
WNU Editor: A good summary from the New York Times on why Russian policy is succeeding in Syria.
3 comments:
He's getting out of the way of either a significantly increased air or land campaign by the rest. May have done some quick cost-benefit analysis as well.
jimbrown,
I think you are right. I believe he had other considerations, but "He's getting out of the way of either a significantly increased air or land campaign by the rest. May have done some quick cost-benefit analysis as well." also rings pretty true. He thinks something big and nasty is coming and doesn't want any stinky stuff on Russia.
I am missing quite a lot here?
Will Iran surge? Will they commit atrocities that Russian does not want be tagged with?
Post a Comment