Originally posted by the Voice of America.
Voice of America content is produced by the Voice of America,
a United States federal government-sponsored entity, and is in
the public domain.
Column: If Maliki Can Go, Why Not Assad?
by Barbara Slavin
The impressive results of U.S. [1]air strikes in Iraq this month are
prompting new calls from some quarters for similar U.S. intervention in
Syria.
Abdulrahman Dadam, president of the Free Aleppo Governorate Council,
[2]wrote an impassioned plea for a U.S./NATO no fly zone to protect his
historic city from both the Islamic State (IS) and the regime of Bashar
al-Assad and establish a safe corridor from Turkey for humanitarian
aid.
"The fall of Aleppo would precipitate a series of catastrophic events
in Syria, further tipping the scales in favor of Assad's forces and the
expansion of ISIS," Dadam warned. "Without air support and weapons from
the United States, we stand little chance to prevent this collapse and
sustain our city as a beacon for Syrians engaged in the two-front
conflict against both terrorists and the regime."
For someone who advocated such a no fly zone in Syria three years ago -
before the rise of IS - Dadam's arguments have merit. But for now, it
seems unlikely that the Obama administration will open a second front
against IS without a broader regional and international consensus about
what the future of Syria should be.
The peaceful removal of Nouri al-Maliki as prime minister of Iraq
created an important precedent. Maliki - whose State of Law party
actually won a reasonably fair election in April - agreed not to seek a
third term under pressure from both the United States and Iran as well
as the senior Shi'ite Muslim cleric in Iraq, Ayatollah Ali Sistani.
Other important countries that have been hostile to the Maliki
government, such as Turkey and Saudi Arabia, also signaled their
approval for the designation of a new prime minister, Haider al-Abadi.
Unfortunately, such a broad consensus is lacking when it comes to
Assad, who recently "won" a third seven-year term in an election that
offered no viable competition.
Russia and Iran continue to support him and Assad has cleverly used the
menace of IS to argue that even his bloody regime is superior to a
group so extreme that it has been excommunicated by al-Qaida central.
He was, of course, complicit in the rise of this Frankenstein's monster
- opening the prisons and releasing Islamic extremists in an effort to
discredit more moderate opposition forces. He also bought time by
dribbling out his known stocks of chemical weapons, all of which
[3]have now been destroyed.
Just because Assad sees himself as irreplaceable does not mean he is or
need be much longer. The U.S. should build on the diplomacy it used to
pass a [4]UN Security Council Resolution last week against IS to revive
consultations on a post-Assad future for Syria that can bring together
elements of the regime with the moderate Syrian opposition. Squeezed
between Assad and IS, the moderates currently have no chance of success
- even with much greater U.S. military support.
Key players in this new diplomatic effort include the U.S., Turkey,
Saudi Arabia, Russia and Iran. The latest UN special envoy for Syria,
[5]Staffan de Mistura, should be in charge of the process. Unlike the
failed "Geneva II" talks - from which Iran was excluded at the last
minute - [6]Tehran must be an integral party from the start.
Iranian officials have indicated that they have no love for Assad but
have backed him in the absence of a credible alternative. However, the
rise of IS - which is now on the border with Iran in Iraq's Diyala
province - has altered Iranian priorities and put the U.S. and Iran
together in a tacit alliance against the Sunni extremists in Iraq.
If elements of the Syrian regime and opposition can coalesce on an
anti-IS platform, that could change the calculations in both Tehran and
Washington. It is certainly a topic worth discussing on the sidelines
of upcoming nuclear negotiations.
The U.S. strategy against IS in Iraq is only succeeding because the
Iraqi government and the Kurdish Peshmerga are cooperating and
providing the necessary ground forces.
Interrupting his Martha's Vineyard vacation earlier this week to mark
the recapture of the strategic Mosul dam from IS, President Obama
noted, "this operation demonstrates that Iraqi and Kurdish forces are
capable of working together in taking the fight to ISIL. If they
continue to do so, they will have the strong support of the United
States of America."
U.S. policy in Syria should shift from half-hearted opposition to both
IS and Assad to building a coalition against IS that a majority of
Syrians can support. This will be a major diplomatic project that
might also entail more U.S. military involvement which could be easily
justified by humanitarian aims, such as protecting a humanitarian
corridor to Aleppo.
Without a broader strategy, however, Congress is likely to balk - as
was evident a year ago when Congress refused to approve U.S. air
strikes on Syria's chemical weapons.
With nearly 200,000 dead, a third of the population displaced and much
of Syria destroyed, it is imperative that the U.S. and the rest of the
international community revive their efforts to find a political
solution that will remove Assad and unite a majority of Syrians against
IS. Every day that the Syrian war continues, it creates more potential
recruits for IS in Syria and in neighboring states overflowing with
Syrian refugees.
Although Obama hasn't mentioned Syria much lately. it is not sufficient
just to fight IS in Iraq. This cancer must be attacked from both sides
if it is to be defeated.
__________________________________________________________________
[7]http://www.voanews.com/content/slavin-if-maliki-can-go-why-not-assad
/2422141.html
References
1. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/19/world/middleeast/iraq-mosul-dam.html?ref=world&_r=0
2. http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/menasource/a-real-syria-policy-starts-with-saving-aleppo
3. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/19/world/middleeast/syrias-chemical-arsenal-fully-destroyed-us-says.html
4. http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=48494#.U_Nx48VdVOM
5. http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=48244#.U_N4DcVdVOM
6. http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2013/05/russia-us-syria-talks-iran.html
7. http://www.voanews.com/content/slavin-if-maliki-can-go-why-not-assad/2422141.html