1 readers online now  |  69 million page views

A Somewhat Different Scoring

Reader comment on item: Scoring the Syria Deal

Submitted by stuffagain (United States), Sep 17, 2013 at 17:16

The regimen implied by the OPCW protocols, if accepted by the US, Russia and Assad, may extend over many years; perhaps a decade. This is the amount time necessary to locate, catalogue and destroy the CW. Moreover, these activities must take place under the aegis of Assad regime functionaries. In light of this we should modify the winners and losers list.

Assad is a big winner. The US can no longer support the overthrow of Assad while working through the OPCW protocols with his regime. The prospective, "unbelievably small" attack on Syria is suspended, and likely the arms support to the Sunni coalition as well. The US is transformed from potential adversary to bystander. I assume here that the loss of CW is not a great loss to Assad as they can be readily replaced.

Russia and Putin are big winners. In the Syrian conflict a primary goal of Russia is that its client Assad maintains power. This is made more likely by the removal of the US as a potential ally of and armorer to the Sunni opposition. The Russian lodgment in the Middle East is thereby strengthened.

The Sunni opposition is a big loser by virtue of losing the US as prospective ally.

Obama is a slight winner. By transforming the administration policy position form Assad must go, to CW must go, he will take the media spotlight away from their foreign policy incompetence.

The US is a loser by virtue of losing influence in this part of the Middle East to Russia. Perhaps we can turn our attention now to the Iran nuclear development, but I doubt it. Although it is true we had no dog in this fight, it would have been better if it had ended without loss of US influence.

Israel loses whenever US influence in the region is diminished.

Submitting....

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to A Somewhat Different Scoring by stuffagain

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List
eXTReMe Tracker

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2020 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)