Insanity is doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results. Have we not tried this formula by arming moderate(??) insurgents against Assad? What good has come off that? Quite simply, it has not worked! We have only added fuel to the fire. The insurgents have become a totally disarrayed, disparate, fractious, vicious groups, one worse than the other. Loyalties are shed like snakes' skins, so that we cannot distinguish friends from foes anymore. And out of the embers of the Middle East have risen the ISIS and their deadly Caliphate which has embroiled the whole world. So we've been there, done that. Why don't we try something completely different? Like maybe join hands with Assad?
8
Encouraging defections by Syria's officers would probably help to bring down Assad. But is it a good idea to bring Assad down?
Assad's downfall would not end the war, since the different factions opposing him would continue to fight it out.
Assad's fall would not be in the interest of the people of Syria, since the earliest possible end to the civil war would be a victory by the current regime.
Assad's fall would not be in the interest of the U.S., since he would be replaced by someone who is as bad, or more likely worse, from our point of view.
As "Justice Holmes" commented here, have we learned nothing? The results of our interventions in Iraq, Egypt, Libya, and Afghanistan ought to have taught us something. We need to stop trying to overthrow bad regimes and mind our own business.
Assad's downfall would not end the war, since the different factions opposing him would continue to fight it out.
Assad's fall would not be in the interest of the people of Syria, since the earliest possible end to the civil war would be a victory by the current regime.
Assad's fall would not be in the interest of the U.S., since he would be replaced by someone who is as bad, or more likely worse, from our point of view.
As "Justice Holmes" commented here, have we learned nothing? The results of our interventions in Iraq, Egypt, Libya, and Afghanistan ought to have taught us something. We need to stop trying to overthrow bad regimes and mind our own business.
12
HAVE TO GET THEIR FAMILIES OUT AS WELL! What anti-Assad officer would abandon his family to possibly fatal reprisal?
The US should not give anyone in Syria any money.
The US should not give anyone in Syria any weapons.
The US should not be involved in Syria at all.
It isn't our problem.
The US should not give anyone in Syria any weapons.
The US should not be involved in Syria at all.
It isn't our problem.
5
Does the US really wish Assad gone? There is one great advantage to Mr. Assad's presence: he isn't ISIS. We need assurances from the Alawhites, et al, that they can effectively defend the country against the nightmare of an ISIS takeover.
4
We paid money to high ranking Nazi officials after WWII to come to America and initiate plans to destroy the horrible Communist regime. Back then, American leaders thought that was a good idea, compromising American values and justice to get ahead. Now you want to do the same thing in a war where the good guys are hard to find. Why not this? Better just go in, destroy Assad's regime, covertly of course, destroy all the other small groups including ISIS and then all you have left are just ordinary people. But remember, if you do this make sure there is no backlash from the world.
2
Mr Ghanem of Syria seems to be of the same ilk as Ahmad Chalabi of Iraq. A traitor to his own country now wants to recruit others to treachery. To me the strange thing is how America finds these people. More probably, America probably has a factory somewhere where it "manufactures" such individuals.
5
Sorry, Mr. Ghanem, but we in America are finally beginning to realize that fighting other nation's wars by toppling leadership through subversion or overt warfare has been absolutely disastrous. Humanitarian disasters were the results. We did this in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Yemen, to name only a few of the most recent. And now you have a grand scheme to have us do it again, and this time in Syria. Do you imagine the neocons and nolibs continue to exert authority over the US foreign policy? Well, the people of the US are not buying it anymore.
So, Russia is attempting to prop up the Assad regime so that a united front against our real enemy, ISIS, can be strengthened, and you want us to mount a subversive effort with our US Dollars against the far more sound Russian strategic plan? You like the proxy war idea from your comfortable writing table, don't you.
The civil war in Syria will not end like the civil war in Libya as you'd apparently enjoy. The people of the USA are starting to wake up, finally, to the fool's game we've been playing at the behest of foreign powers and our own military-industrial conglomerates.
Nice try. The answer is NO! And tell that to your friends at the NYTimes.
So, Russia is attempting to prop up the Assad regime so that a united front against our real enemy, ISIS, can be strengthened, and you want us to mount a subversive effort with our US Dollars against the far more sound Russian strategic plan? You like the proxy war idea from your comfortable writing table, don't you.
The civil war in Syria will not end like the civil war in Libya as you'd apparently enjoy. The people of the USA are starting to wake up, finally, to the fool's game we've been playing at the behest of foreign powers and our own military-industrial conglomerates.
Nice try. The answer is NO! And tell that to your friends at the NYTimes.
6
why Mr. Ghanem is wrong:
1) The Syrian Brass saw what happened to Iraq's after Saddam was "toppled". They were out in the cold, without paychecks, being hunted by masked avengers.
The Syrian Gov knows it must "hang together" or they will surely all hang separately.
2) The Us has already been doing what he calls for, we've got all we can get worth anything when they thought Assad would fall on his own, or The West was going to send in the (7th) Cavalry, but now...
3) Following Russian doctrine, from Stalingrad and Kursk, trading a soldier for a soldier to get the odds to move from 2 to 1 on to 4 to 1 on to..., Syrian troops are gaining making Much of the opposition ready to escape....local cease fires amounting to surrenders are going to fall like dominoes as opposition fighters see the cavalry is not coming at all. (actually attrition was also the winning strategy of Unconditional Surrender GRANT in our civil war...)
1) The Syrian Brass saw what happened to Iraq's after Saddam was "toppled". They were out in the cold, without paychecks, being hunted by masked avengers.
The Syrian Gov knows it must "hang together" or they will surely all hang separately.
2) The Us has already been doing what he calls for, we've got all we can get worth anything when they thought Assad would fall on his own, or The West was going to send in the (7th) Cavalry, but now...
3) Following Russian doctrine, from Stalingrad and Kursk, trading a soldier for a soldier to get the odds to move from 2 to 1 on to 4 to 1 on to..., Syrian troops are gaining making Much of the opposition ready to escape....local cease fires amounting to surrenders are going to fall like dominoes as opposition fighters see the cavalry is not coming at all. (actually attrition was also the winning strategy of Unconditional Surrender GRANT in our civil war...)
1
If you change a few words around (e. swap out "Assad" for "Hussein", and "Alawite officers" for "Baathist Officers") then this article may have just as well been written in 2003/4 about the situation occurring then in Iraq. Have we really learned nothing? Does this foolish and dangerous neocon-style foreign policy thinking still hold any water despite evidence of it failing time after time?
This strategy is foolish to the point of being dangerous. Bribing our enemies does not make them our allies. It just makes them our enemies, but now with more cash in their pockets. Its time that the foreign policy makers here finally accepted the fact that we cannot export American style democracy, or democratic values. Middle eastern countries have their own unique political and civil culture, and no amount of bribery, or even good faith "nation building" efforts will ever turn Syria into a functioning US-Style democracy.
This strategy is foolish to the point of being dangerous. Bribing our enemies does not make them our allies. It just makes them our enemies, but now with more cash in their pockets. Its time that the foreign policy makers here finally accepted the fact that we cannot export American style democracy, or democratic values. Middle eastern countries have their own unique political and civil culture, and no amount of bribery, or even good faith "nation building" efforts will ever turn Syria into a functioning US-Style democracy.
4
I remember when Ahmad Chalabi, Iraqi exile, sold this same story to Cheney, Bush, and co. Just overthrow the bad guy, there will be peace! Democratic, secular leaders are just waiting to take over rule.
It wasn't true in Iraq, but I'm supposed to believe it will work in Syria?
It wasn't true in Iraq, but I'm supposed to believe it will work in Syria?
6
Notice the date and think of the terrible destruction since then that American policy has abetted:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/22/world/middleeast/us-to-focus-on-forcib...
July 21, 2012
As Diplomacy Stalls, U.S. Refines Plan to Remove Assad
By ERIC SCHMITT and HELENE COOPER
Though it will not provide arms to the Syrian rebels, the U.S. is likely to supply intelligence and communication aid to help forcibly bring down the government of President Bashar al-Assad.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/22/world/middleeast/us-to-focus-on-forcib...
July 21, 2012
As Diplomacy Stalls, U.S. Refines Plan to Remove Assad
By ERIC SCHMITT and HELENE COOPER
Though it will not provide arms to the Syrian rebels, the U.S. is likely to supply intelligence and communication aid to help forcibly bring down the government of President Bashar al-Assad.
4
Just as with the premise to invade Iraq, the campaign for regime change in Syria appears to be bait and switch, smoke and mirrors.
Arguments commonly focus on the "badness" of Assad but obscure the real, post-regime alternatives.
"We" should be fighting against one side, but we aren't given a real picture of who then, we are fighting with ( Sunni Islamists, Al Queda, and then a handful of "Free Syrian Army" fighters, and even ISIS?).
It is even been evident that there has also been some tacit support for ISIS from the Gulf States, and from Turkey's open border of ISIS oil sales, at the very least. The flow of vast amounts of money and equipment to ISIS has amazingly overlooked.
How strong is the Free Syrian Army compared to all the unsavory rebels? It appears that the FSA is held up as the propaganda mascot in the West, while actually being one of the weak influences among the militants.
The strongest motive for regime change also appears to be Sunni sectarianism. Why would it be morally better to military support religious tribal supremacists against an alliance of diverse non-sectarians?
The logic for regime change can't withstand hard daylight.
And it would be really interesting to know the real reasons NYTimes and the State Department, support the collapse of yet another non-sectarian, non-theocratic government holding the line against Sunni Islamist supremacists.
Arguments commonly focus on the "badness" of Assad but obscure the real, post-regime alternatives.
"We" should be fighting against one side, but we aren't given a real picture of who then, we are fighting with ( Sunni Islamists, Al Queda, and then a handful of "Free Syrian Army" fighters, and even ISIS?).
It is even been evident that there has also been some tacit support for ISIS from the Gulf States, and from Turkey's open border of ISIS oil sales, at the very least. The flow of vast amounts of money and equipment to ISIS has amazingly overlooked.
How strong is the Free Syrian Army compared to all the unsavory rebels? It appears that the FSA is held up as the propaganda mascot in the West, while actually being one of the weak influences among the militants.
The strongest motive for regime change also appears to be Sunni sectarianism. Why would it be morally better to military support religious tribal supremacists against an alliance of diverse non-sectarians?
The logic for regime change can't withstand hard daylight.
And it would be really interesting to know the real reasons NYTimes and the State Department, support the collapse of yet another non-sectarian, non-theocratic government holding the line against Sunni Islamist supremacists.
3
This is article is of sunni ideology, highly paid by Saudi and Qatar regime. Totally useless and biased. Assad, if you love or hate, is the only secular leader in the region. Period.
8
Germany and Japan were ready to return to democracy in 1945, which we can't say about Muslim countries today.
You can't just bring in a government from the top down there, because that's kind of what we did in Iraq. If it was ever going to work, it would have worked under President George W. Bush.
What you CAN do is bring in enough religious diversity to take the fate of the country out of the hands of local warlord imams. Given time, Christian missionaries can bring enough people out of Islam or Hinduism or other smaller sects in less-populous areas to allow a consensus to form that is apart from religion.
This process takes time for believers to associate with others from other areas, but it is building a new China, and when that country finally is finished with socialist totalitarianism, the religious groups will provide stability there.
One way to jump-start the development of a democracy in an Arab country is to facilitate the return of non-Muslims who left because of the terrors of war. Many emigree' Arabs intend to return one day anyway.
You can't just bring in a government from the top down there, because that's kind of what we did in Iraq. If it was ever going to work, it would have worked under President George W. Bush.
What you CAN do is bring in enough religious diversity to take the fate of the country out of the hands of local warlord imams. Given time, Christian missionaries can bring enough people out of Islam or Hinduism or other smaller sects in less-populous areas to allow a consensus to form that is apart from religion.
This process takes time for believers to associate with others from other areas, but it is building a new China, and when that country finally is finished with socialist totalitarianism, the religious groups will provide stability there.
One way to jump-start the development of a democracy in an Arab country is to facilitate the return of non-Muslims who left because of the terrors of war. Many emigree' Arabs intend to return one day anyway.
For 4 years and over, Mr. Assad has been able to resist an invasion of Takfiris, and Jihadists invading Syria with weaponry provided by the Saudis, the Turks and other countries to topple Assad. Has it been possible to resist these forces without any significant popular support behind the government? Please, stop creating imaginary scenarios to justify the criminal war that has almost destroyed a country like NATO helped destroying Lybia, Irak et. al. Show a little respect for international law and keep hands out of Syria
3
Only a sick mind politically, can suggest to help Assad's official, the head of the legitimate government to defect. At the beginning, everyone, including the Americans had accepted the argument of fighting Assad. But now at last everything is clear. The malicious maneuvers by the clowns rulers of the Arabian Peninsula, have been understood and Americans are starting, with some shame to see that Putin was right. The only way to end this slaughter is the efficient cooperation and decisive action against the Syrian insurgents. Achieved pacification, one can democratically decide if the Syrians want to change.
3
The purpose of this proposal is to undermine the stability of the Assad regime, but before we do so we should be asking ourselves what that would accomplish. Yeah, Assad is a murderer but are any opponents likely to achieve power in Syria any better? What possible gain, either practically or ethically, do we achieve were Assad to fall, to be succeeded by the al Nusra Front?
Furthermore, as stated in the article, both Iran and Russia insist on the continuation of that regime and have forces committed to ensure that.
So we should ask ourselves, is the Baathist regime itself completely unacceptable to us or simply the person of Assad? Because if it is the latter, such could possibly also be acceptable to all outside parties and much of those rebelling within Syria.
We should not seek to destabilize Syria and to replace one murderous regime with one even worse.
Furthermore, as stated in the article, both Iran and Russia insist on the continuation of that regime and have forces committed to ensure that.
So we should ask ourselves, is the Baathist regime itself completely unacceptable to us or simply the person of Assad? Because if it is the latter, such could possibly also be acceptable to all outside parties and much of those rebelling within Syria.
We should not seek to destabilize Syria and to replace one murderous regime with one even worse.
1
When I first read this I thought it was disgusting. Then the thought came to me that paying people to change sides or defect might be considered differently in the Middle East. I was being ethnocentric in thinking the idea was morally wrong. However, we do have our own beliefs so we should not agree to the plan.
1
This idea is nonsense. Putin has put his reputation on the line in entering Syria supporting Assad and bribing a few "officers" to defect will do nothing but waste money; there are many eager to take their places.
The best way to use our funds -- if we choose to spend anything at all on that hopeless region -- is to aid those with the talent and desire to make the Russian intervention a miserable debacle. Pouring funds and arms into the supposed opponents of Assad who had neither was an idiotic strategy to begin with. The issue then is whether our intelligence community can identify these few.
The US surely has learned by now that democracy, as we define it, can be neither exported nor imposed. The Mid East is composed of tribal cultures to which the idea of rule by the people is so foreign as to be beyond comprehension. The only viable strategy, as abhorrent as many here might find it, is to identify the strongest leaders there that are happy to have their allegiances bought, and do so, with money and weaponry, so that their survival depends upon our continuing support. Only then can we start to exert our influence upon those leaders to improve the lot of their citizens. That their populace suffers under their control must not deter us from following the path most likely to maintain our influence and achieve a result; our first goal must always be to act in our self interest, not theirs.
The best way to use our funds -- if we choose to spend anything at all on that hopeless region -- is to aid those with the talent and desire to make the Russian intervention a miserable debacle. Pouring funds and arms into the supposed opponents of Assad who had neither was an idiotic strategy to begin with. The issue then is whether our intelligence community can identify these few.
The US surely has learned by now that democracy, as we define it, can be neither exported nor imposed. The Mid East is composed of tribal cultures to which the idea of rule by the people is so foreign as to be beyond comprehension. The only viable strategy, as abhorrent as many here might find it, is to identify the strongest leaders there that are happy to have their allegiances bought, and do so, with money and weaponry, so that their survival depends upon our continuing support. Only then can we start to exert our influence upon those leaders to improve the lot of their citizens. That their populace suffers under their control must not deter us from following the path most likely to maintain our influence and achieve a result; our first goal must always be to act in our self interest, not theirs.
2
First and foremost you have to know the US interest is not ousting Assad anymore:
1-When I read such a title about encouraging Alawite officers to defect in 2016 after 5 years of the conflict, I can assure you that whoever suggesting this is in complete detachment from reality. Your plan may have worked in the past with small officials such as the Syrian embassy’s ones.
2-After all the massacres conducted against their villages (on sectarian bases), after every single Alawite house has lost a martyr, after their women were kidnapped, you think that these officers will be attracted to few thousands and asylum in USA? The Islamic opposition (the armed and political) has made it impossible to attract minorities to join them, they see Assad better. Such a plan failed in 2012, there is no reason to repeat a failed try??
3-Neither the US nor the European interest is to topple Assad anymore; they have learnt a tough lesson when terrorism reached out their soil. They know that when an iron rule is freely fallen, an alternative plastic one will fail to secure the country, and then terrorism and chaos will prevail. Be sure that few thousands of dollars and asylum will not buy Assad’s Alawite officers’ loyalty, but just some cheap traitors who can sell their nation for money, those have already deserted. It is too late to play this expired card.
4- After Russian campaign started, and the recent SAA advances, it would be unrealistic planning to convince Alawite officers to defect.
1-When I read such a title about encouraging Alawite officers to defect in 2016 after 5 years of the conflict, I can assure you that whoever suggesting this is in complete detachment from reality. Your plan may have worked in the past with small officials such as the Syrian embassy’s ones.
2-After all the massacres conducted against their villages (on sectarian bases), after every single Alawite house has lost a martyr, after their women were kidnapped, you think that these officers will be attracted to few thousands and asylum in USA? The Islamic opposition (the armed and political) has made it impossible to attract minorities to join them, they see Assad better. Such a plan failed in 2012, there is no reason to repeat a failed try??
3-Neither the US nor the European interest is to topple Assad anymore; they have learnt a tough lesson when terrorism reached out their soil. They know that when an iron rule is freely fallen, an alternative plastic one will fail to secure the country, and then terrorism and chaos will prevail. Be sure that few thousands of dollars and asylum will not buy Assad’s Alawite officers’ loyalty, but just some cheap traitors who can sell their nation for money, those have already deserted. It is too late to play this expired card.
4- After Russian campaign started, and the recent SAA advances, it would be unrealistic planning to convince Alawite officers to defect.
1
Especially lucrative offers should be made to those who involved in "so called" civilian killings. They should be told that America will created jobs for them where unrestricted use of guns will be not only allowed but encouraged. America could use such well trained people to solve the "problems" in Afghania, Pakia, Libya, Yemen, etc. Of course, once the new recruits start showing results in the present conflict zones, we could start new conflicts.
1
John Kerry is much smarter than this writer gives him credit.
The horror of this Syrian civil war is the humanitarian crisis it has brought.
The world community must put intense pressure on Syria --from all directions -- to stop the fighting. If that means cease fires and the heaviest sanctions ever imposed for violating them, so be it. The U.S. should not pay off anyone who has perpetuated killing in this unholy war, no matter what stripes they wear, today or tomorrow.
Whatever the U.S. does, John Kerry must continue to represent a very strong position to prevent conditions for total ISIS enjoyed chaos, like that caused by the former Secretary of State's precipitous actions in Libya, without consideration of a sound transition plan for governance.
The horror of this Syrian civil war is the humanitarian crisis it has brought.
The world community must put intense pressure on Syria --from all directions -- to stop the fighting. If that means cease fires and the heaviest sanctions ever imposed for violating them, so be it. The U.S. should not pay off anyone who has perpetuated killing in this unholy war, no matter what stripes they wear, today or tomorrow.
Whatever the U.S. does, John Kerry must continue to represent a very strong position to prevent conditions for total ISIS enjoyed chaos, like that caused by the former Secretary of State's precipitous actions in Libya, without consideration of a sound transition plan for governance.
2
I have often thought that the best way to treat the wars in the middle east, and in fact in any country where poverty is an issue would be to give every adult $5,000 or $10,000 us currency and leave them alone.
It would be cheaper, we would lose no American lives and the country with this flood of money would have a whole new outlook on life and living.
Suddenly, everyone could afford decent housing, food, education , etc. There would be a consumer boom and businesses would develop to take advantage.
We should prohibit American companies from going in and dominating the new economy. There will be winners and losers but there will also be a level playing field. to start.
I for one an sick and tired of throwing out young people into horrific wars and when they come back broken in mind and body, ignoring them.
It would be cheaper, we would lose no American lives and the country with this flood of money would have a whole new outlook on life and living.
Suddenly, everyone could afford decent housing, food, education , etc. There would be a consumer boom and businesses would develop to take advantage.
We should prohibit American companies from going in and dominating the new economy. There will be winners and losers but there will also be a level playing field. to start.
I for one an sick and tired of throwing out young people into horrific wars and when they come back broken in mind and body, ignoring them.
2
The only way theocracy Arab countries with muslim majority population will change and become more tolerant of other religions, cultures and tribes is to get rid of their theocracies and put in an international organisation or government to oversee the nations being restructured as a Democracy. Like what happened to Japan after World War Two.
next time, another cold war by intermediate ... marvelous for a moderate opposition ...
What? Pay Syrian defectors? This is absurd. It is also absurd for US neocons to arm and train "moderate" rebel death squads to destroy the sovereign country of Syria. What are we doing in Syria, anyway?
Apparently, there is a rush to the $500 billion EU oil & gas market. Both Qatar and Iran want to run gas & oil pipelines through Syria (Syria agreed with their ally Russia that there would be an Iranian gas pipeline built through Syria to reach the EU market) but Israel wants neither Iran nor Qatar to build a oil/gas pipeline through Syria because Israel wants to beat them both to the EU gas market by shipping their newfound gas discovered off the coast of Israel first.
See this interesting "Syria oil and gas pipeline" argument here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qe305BxUXCI
Apparently, there is a rush to the $500 billion EU oil & gas market. Both Qatar and Iran want to run gas & oil pipelines through Syria (Syria agreed with their ally Russia that there would be an Iranian gas pipeline built through Syria to reach the EU market) but Israel wants neither Iran nor Qatar to build a oil/gas pipeline through Syria because Israel wants to beat them both to the EU gas market by shipping their newfound gas discovered off the coast of Israel first.
See this interesting "Syria oil and gas pipeline" argument here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qe305BxUXCI
3
Haven't any "thinkers" figured out that the Middle East is populated by "duplicitous people"? The Assad government has "cozied up to Russia's Putin, and none in that country are interested in anything but "their agendas". How does throwing money at "whomever will take it" solve the problem. We as Americans should leave the entire area to the Russians and let them "support" the entire country. History "had shown" that Russia cannot take care of their own people, let alone other countries. We cannot solve their problem, so bring our armed forces home, and rebuild our country for a change. Even our "allies" do not always agree with us, and we send them an allowance. Stop being the world's policemen, the Middle East is biding their time until they can make a move to take over the world. And "some" say, give them money? Hello, is anyone out there?
6
Just makes me wonder if people from this part of the world value money over everything else like standing up and fighting for something that is greater than the US$. It is particularly painful to see young people of military age seeking refugee status rather than taking a stand for a cause bigger then themselves. Just remember, we bought of the Afghan warlords with suitcases full of dollars. The hemorrhaging of blood and dollars continues.
12
Really? Didn't we learn our lesson from Obama and Hillary's debacle in Egypt? Libya? Or Bush in Iraq?
6
Arming the "moderate rebels" did not work so well; so let's see if bribing them would?
6
Continual reference to "moderate" opposition forces. How are they defined?
6
Why anyone from a Western world democracy would want a person from a theocracy, with medieval infrastructure and laws, to work in a government department in a well organised western world democratic infrastructure is beyond me! World War two only lasted five years but muslim wars are continuous around the world because their governments and government officials are corrupt with the permission of the public. The only reason the Islamic state is strong in Syria is with the permission of the public. Muslims want western world money and help with infrastructure but still want to keep their medieval laws that have no place in democracies.
7
This is a dastardly and probably illegal proposal. Will the Arabs ever learn to solve their own problems without Western intervention?
8
and the Syrian government will be replaced by................?
10
...We have good relations with the Zionist entity. They already hold Syrian territory (Golan Heights). We could encourage them to take over the governorship of the rest of Syria.
The Assad government is the legitimate and internationallty recognized government of Syria. The vast majority of the Syrian people support Assad and regard him as a national hero. "Helping Assad's officers defect" is just one way of interfering in Syria's internal affairs, which is a violation of international law, not that our rogue government cares about such niceties. We do the same thing to all the other governments we have overthrown or tried to overthrow for the last 70 years.. Will we ever be a decent country again? Only if there is enough decency in the American people to demand it.
35
If Assad is so popular, why does he needs iranians and russians to support him with troops, tanks and bombers ?
And being the head of a state in a despotism means nothing.
And being the head of a state in a despotism means nothing.
4
Exactly and we proclaim to the world we are right when in reality we are the criminals and void of thought. We are the worlds biggest hypocrites on planet earth.
4
Where are you getting your facts? Assad was only of middling popularity before the uprising several years ago -- it strains belief to imagine he's now regarded as a national hero by the vast majority of Syrians, after barrel bombs, nerve gas, and countless murders. Maybe in the Russian media, but not anywhere else.
I agree that this is a terrible idea, likely to misfire in all sorts of unpredictable ways. But we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that Assad's conduct remains deplorable and criminal, even if there's no readily available alternative to his regime.
I agree that this is a terrible idea, likely to misfire in all sorts of unpredictable ways. But we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that Assad's conduct remains deplorable and criminal, even if there's no readily available alternative to his regime.
9
Stop trying to overthrow the government of Syria. Bring home all our troops, operatives, and contractors. Stop all the money and arms going to any group in the region. Stop saying "Assad must go". This is another war of choice for the United States. ISIS is not going to invade the United States.
9
This is only common sense.
The way to have friends, is to be a good friend. Here we have potential defectors from Assad who will be our friends if we reach out to them and help them. We should have done so four years ago. We should do it now.
The way to have friends, is to be a good friend. Here we have potential defectors from Assad who will be our friends if we reach out to them and help them. We should have done so four years ago. We should do it now.
2
Remember the over throw of Mossadeq in Iran? How did that play out?
The suggestion that we should treat Syrian military officers with dirty hands better than refugees fleeing the violence the Syrian military has perpetuated is fraught with problems.
If Assad leaves tomorrow, we simply switch to phase two where the various insurgents and terrorists fight each other for control of Syria.
If Assad leaves tomorrow, we simply switch to phase two where the various insurgents and terrorists fight each other for control of Syria.
8
We are already paying terrorists to overthrow him, now this guy wants to officailly bribe foreign government officials to overthrow him, wow. This is called sedition/treason in Syria, but here it begs to become a part of our foreign policy. Maybe this guy can explain why all the Christians had to be slaughtered by these terrorists calling themselves rebels. You can't possibly understand Syria, without understanding Libya, and how we supported Al Qeada in the toppling of a sovereign state. Syria was next on the agenda for regime change, but it was not the cake walk these blood thirsty goons envisioned. The people flatly rejected these "rebel/terrorist" out of hand and began fleeing the country as Syria began to fill up with a mercenary army, whose command and control became Al Nusra,(Al Qaeda). The millions of refugees are smoking gun evidence this was not a popular uprising, but just another color revolution with the CIA in the thick of it with Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey, making up a nexus of terror that was getting so bad the Russians were forced to get in. You might want to get a map also, Turkey is in Russia's backyard, and they are the main enabler of ISIS, and really the entire rebel forces. We are in a bad p[lace to be, on the wrong side. Continuing to Lie is not helping, regime change in Ukraine was another disaster we had our mitts in also, the entire policy needs to change ASAP for the good of humanity. Why the times continually supports War is a mystery.
11
This is the spirit of FREE Enterprise. Free in the sense of un-tethered to morality, honesty, decorum, honesty, sense of fairness. The depravity of the article tell a lot about the article and maybe about the Times.
1
As much as I would like to see the civil war end, I think this is a terrible idea. I am assuming that most of these "officers and/or officials" are Alewatis or Druses; if they want to defect, why not ask for help from their "friends" in Iran? And, if they are Sunnis, they should call the Saudis.
This is NOT a fight where the U.S. Should get involved in any way!
This is NOT a fight where the U.S. Should get involved in any way!
10
The problem is that any officers who have not already left the Assad regime may have committed or been complacent with the War Crimes committed by Assad. We can not offer money or asylum to anyone who may be a war criminal.
5
Then why does Henry Kissinger still reside among us?
6
It's as good a suggestion as any I have heard. We would not have to consider this if Obama had sent in troops to defeat Assad & ISIS at the same Time. Russia would not have a foothold in the Middle East & be supporting Assad. But it was more important for Obama to work a Sham of a Deal with Iran & to do that he had to lay down in Bed with Putin. How hypocritical can you be.Sorry Obama lovers, history will record his feckless leadership.
4
Ignoring the problem of ISIS and its supporter/funders, a political transition from Assad would increase...by the United States paying off and providing refuge for Assad's top level defectors? Sure, a political transition may be in place, but how is this a legitimate transfer of power especially when it's instigated and bought by the United States? If we look close to a neighboring country: Iraq, we have a perfect example of a country that is barely holding on after a transfer of power to an illegitimate government. Stability and peace bought and sold by an outside source is a recipe for more war and extremism.
6
If they want money and asylum they can go to Germany like the millions of others. Apparently the German government is going to rent Holiday Inns and Wyndham Hotels to put them up in the Berlin area. One wonders who is going to remain in the mideast after everyone has left for Europe. Perhaps the Europeans could colonize Syria and make it productive.
3
Sometimes it is too difficult to sort out all the sects involved in this insane battle, proving once again that religion is the scourge of all wars.
2
evidently we have not learned from Iraqs' fiasco, just work with the existing government then call for elections where Assad is not a candidate, Russia will co-operate.
5
Of course we have learnt. We have learnt that:
1. we can start wars anywhere in the word.
2. We can invade countries whenever we want
3. We can kill thousands of people, and nobody can start "Nuremberg Trials" against us.
4. As long as we have 8 Armies, 9 AirForces and 10 Fleets, WE ARE THE MASTERS
1. we can start wars anywhere in the word.
2. We can invade countries whenever we want
3. We can kill thousands of people, and nobody can start "Nuremberg Trials" against us.
4. As long as we have 8 Armies, 9 AirForces and 10 Fleets, WE ARE THE MASTERS
1
sounds like an unethical, immoral, and useless plan.
15
After we manage to destroy Assad's military, if we manage to do that, exactly who do we think will fill the void? More than likely it will be ISIL/ISIS who will have a whole new country, with chemical WMDs, to kill in and to kill from. Is that what WE really want?
12
There will be no VOID. The land is being cleared; it will get populated. America is preparing the land for Zionist expansion.
Good Lord if the regime of Assad is criminal, then what do we call the Wahhabi Kingdom of Saudi Arabia? Not only is Saudi Arabia the wellspring of all Islamist terror, but in their war to gain petro market share at any cost, they are destroying the credit markets of the entire world. Assad is Secular and Cosmopolitan, while his opponents represent the kind of tribal nationalism that set the stage for the Great War of 1914 in Europe, and led to a thirty years war, which ended in Gotterdamerung in 1945. Why on earth would we want to see the Saudi mercenary army of ISIS on the Mediterranean Sea with close proximity to Europe and the Caucasus?
14
I don't know much about the situation in Syria or the process of offering financial incentives to military defectors, so I don't know how workable this, but if I just take this at face value, for argument's sake, it sounds not unreasonable to me. If we want to help end this, and many Americans do think we should stay out of it, then I think we'll probably need to get over how things "should" happen and be open to anything that could work. I'm not a fan of meddling in civil wars, either, but the toll of the war gives me pause.
Again, I don't know how workable this is, but it seems to me that the worst-case scenario is probably that we get some officers who oppose Assad to defect in a way that helps ensure the safety of their families, for a cost that is not unreasonable, without this really contributing much of anything to the end the conflict.
Would the situation change considerably if we got enough officers to defect to achieve some sort of Critical Mass? I don't think anyone can know until we try. Having a more coherent policy would certainly help, but meanwhile, maybe this could provide some leverage. My two cents only.
Again, I don't know how workable this is, but it seems to me that the worst-case scenario is probably that we get some officers who oppose Assad to defect in a way that helps ensure the safety of their families, for a cost that is not unreasonable, without this really contributing much of anything to the end the conflict.
Would the situation change considerably if we got enough officers to defect to achieve some sort of Critical Mass? I don't think anyone can know until we try. Having a more coherent policy would certainly help, but meanwhile, maybe this could provide some leverage. My two cents only.
1
How about we keep out of it altogether?
8
Bob,
Thank you for your comment. The human toll of the war gets to me, so I'd like us to help end it, if, and that's a big IF, our help would really be helpful. (We have made so many "helpful" foreign-policy decisions in the past.) If we do decide to keep out of it altogether, then that's exactly what we need to do, in my opinion. We've been sending the Syrians mixed messages for some time.
We need to get it together and decide what our role is, if any, and stick with it unless there's definite reason to change course. Our thinking-out-loud style of policy with regard to Syria has not only been unhelpful, but also, it has been destructive, I believe. Although we've lost standing in the world, we're still the United States, and we're supposed to stand for democracy and human rights and all that. If we can't help, we need to make it clear and get out of the way. My two cents only.
Thank you for your comment. The human toll of the war gets to me, so I'd like us to help end it, if, and that's a big IF, our help would really be helpful. (We have made so many "helpful" foreign-policy decisions in the past.) If we do decide to keep out of it altogether, then that's exactly what we need to do, in my opinion. We've been sending the Syrians mixed messages for some time.
We need to get it together and decide what our role is, if any, and stick with it unless there's definite reason to change course. Our thinking-out-loud style of policy with regard to Syria has not only been unhelpful, but also, it has been destructive, I believe. Although we've lost standing in the world, we're still the United States, and we're supposed to stand for democracy and human rights and all that. If we can't help, we need to make it clear and get out of the way. My two cents only.
2
The entire world outside brainwashed America, its EU vassals, and Nazified Ukraine is laughing. The United States, once admired, then feared, is now the laughing stock of the world.
Put me down on the side of those who say this idea to buy off the Assad military is arrant nonsense. Have we learned nothing?
9
Indeed. What this article is talking about is bribing officers of a foreign country to commit treason. There are no depths to which we will not stoop.
2
Unfortunately, the Obama administration have just provided broken promises and delivered nothing. Russia and Iran are delivering weapons and are actively participating in killing thousands of innocent Syrians. We all Syrians are not asking for US troops on the ground. They are simply asking for help in defending themselves from the criminal ISIS, the Syrian dictator Assad, and his thugs including Hezbollah and Iran's Shia militia. This could be accomplished by providing them with adequate weapons including anti warplanes and others. The cost for such assistant is very low compare to what we spent on other wars, and we will restore our credibility and respect in the area.
2
What a horribly destructive idea. For the United States to be trying to destroy the government of Syria has been impossibly harmful to the people of Syria who have been beset by wildly violent sectarian insurgents who have been abetted by US interference and even support.
Enough. Destroying the Syrian government would mean the complete ruining of Syria.
Enough. Destroying the Syrian government would mean the complete ruining of Syria.
13
The writer of this article do not say anything about the fate of the minorities in Syria if the government falls.
We already know what happens to muslim and christian minorities when subjugated by the sunni fondamentalists.
Now the syrian's opposition do not want to talk to the Kurds in Geneva.
Why on earth should the USA or any other western country come to help sectarians win in Syria ?
We already know what happens to muslim and christian minorities when subjugated by the sunni fondamentalists.
Now the syrian's opposition do not want to talk to the Kurds in Geneva.
Why on earth should the USA or any other western country come to help sectarians win in Syria ?
11
NO. It is up to the people of Syria to make the change if they want it. All we would be doing is throwing more money down a rat hole as we did in Afghanistan, Irag and every other middle eastern country we "helped" and those we paid turned against us. Let Iran have it.
14
I see all the adverse comments below, and most of them occurred to me too, and the idea of a general purchase plan for Assad's henchmen (even high level ones) strikes me as a bad ploy ... just like smuggling Hitler's worst out of Germany and setting them up elsewhere ... about the time of D-Day.
Assad's regime will fail. They cannot keep it up. The reason they want out in the first place is that they can see it, see it clearly now. It is estimated that 1/4 to 1/3 of the young Alewite men have died in this war, young men now being hidden by families to avoid conscription.
But the germ of the idea has some merit if you think about how an army really works and apply it properly: an army fights competently if the sargeants (and similar technical noncoms) do, otherwise not. And it is these people who control and drive/fly/maintain the major army weapon systems (tanks and aircraft, and their munitions).
To be honest about it, we don't care so much about Assad's people per se, even though he is running out of them. But if you could get them to hand over a tank or aircraft or munitions, or verifiably destroy them ... worth more than enough to us to justify paying them so they would be better off in the Syrian refugee diaspora than staying with Assad -- and there could be a sheltered Alewite rebel path to somewhere other than the US.
Thinking a little farther ahead however, you do not want to create an alewite army in exile, plotting some Bay of Pigs.
Assad's regime will fail. They cannot keep it up. The reason they want out in the first place is that they can see it, see it clearly now. It is estimated that 1/4 to 1/3 of the young Alewite men have died in this war, young men now being hidden by families to avoid conscription.
But the germ of the idea has some merit if you think about how an army really works and apply it properly: an army fights competently if the sargeants (and similar technical noncoms) do, otherwise not. And it is these people who control and drive/fly/maintain the major army weapon systems (tanks and aircraft, and their munitions).
To be honest about it, we don't care so much about Assad's people per se, even though he is running out of them. But if you could get them to hand over a tank or aircraft or munitions, or verifiably destroy them ... worth more than enough to us to justify paying them so they would be better off in the Syrian refugee diaspora than staying with Assad -- and there could be a sheltered Alewite rebel path to somewhere other than the US.
Thinking a little farther ahead however, you do not want to create an alewite army in exile, plotting some Bay of Pigs.
2
Vice President joe biden says U.S. is ready to impose a military solution in Syria. The US is just looking for a war with Putin's Russia. Putin's Russia is the only country legally in Syria and Putin really made obama back off and now obama and the neocoms are embarrassed. They are pouting and going to push Putin until we are in another war. Stupid President and even more stupid vice president.
Since when did this war become our responsibility? Everyone criticized Bush for getting involved in Iraq, why, when we are in significant debt, should we worry about Syrians and them having money. This isn't our country, American tax dollars should go to helping Americans, not citizens of foreign countries.
10
We should be involved, not "responsible". There is no way to be isolationist in today's world. We have national interests in virtually every country on Earth.
America is the natural leader among the powers of the planet, but all of our allies should be involved and, by that I mean, help to foot the bill.
America is the natural leader among the powers of the planet, but all of our allies should be involved and, by that I mean, help to foot the bill.
1
Well said Kelly. Why can't our government recognize the wisdom of your words?
1
We should be involved commercially and culturally, but should not be involved overthrowing governments we don't like.
1
This would pit the US against the Saudis in a bidding process that has built the multitudes of Daesh/ISIS. Of course, with the advent of the Russians entering the fray with routine and more precise bombing runs that have cut off the Turkish black market oil enterprise as well as making those $300/month terrorist militia jobs a little dicey, perhaps an option for the criminals who have been trained and deployed by the "western alliance," need a more secure future. It is a situation that I would call, "peak terrorist." Market opportunities abound amidst the rubble we've made of Syria for those not yet on the refugee road.
3
Such a typical "American" habit of solving problems: MONEY MONEY MONEY.
Buy the bad guys off, buy the good guys off. Why not, it works for the politicians back in Washington. Thank God for the United States. We and our money are going to save (buy-off) the world. Money is the solver of all problems. Just get in line and wait your turn.
Buy the bad guys off, buy the good guys off. Why not, it works for the politicians back in Washington. Thank God for the United States. We and our money are going to save (buy-off) the world. Money is the solver of all problems. Just get in line and wait your turn.
22
Mr. Ghanem’s statement, “I know firsthand that Mr. Assad’s deputies would take advantage of this fund. In 2012, an Assad official reached out to the Syrian community in Washington…” should be a red flag as we have been there and done that many times.
Moreover if the State Department and CIA along with other intelligence agencies, whom I am sure Mr. Ghanem has already approached are not interested in his proposal. Now what is the point of this piece?
The appropriate place for this Op-Ed would be Saudi Arabia and Turkey, they are funding the destruction of Syria by providing funds to ISIS the terrorist organization that you elected not to mention; and that in essence provided all that I needed to know about your intentions/aim to write this piece.
Solution to the Syrian mess would not be coming from the US, it has to come from within Syria, it would not come from you sitting comfortably here in US (I presume) and wants your cohorts to join you in the comforts of Virginia.
One of the most serious problem of US Foreign Policy has been not be able to govern the day after achieving short term goal, be it Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, or Yemen. And the same would be the case with Syria. Maybe someone in the Department of State finally figured out that even after spending Billions $ in Jordan we only had one soldier fighting against Assad. Let's work with him.
Peace is what we need, must help in stopping the killing of innocent men, women, and children, your solution will not.
Moreover if the State Department and CIA along with other intelligence agencies, whom I am sure Mr. Ghanem has already approached are not interested in his proposal. Now what is the point of this piece?
The appropriate place for this Op-Ed would be Saudi Arabia and Turkey, they are funding the destruction of Syria by providing funds to ISIS the terrorist organization that you elected not to mention; and that in essence provided all that I needed to know about your intentions/aim to write this piece.
Solution to the Syrian mess would not be coming from the US, it has to come from within Syria, it would not come from you sitting comfortably here in US (I presume) and wants your cohorts to join you in the comforts of Virginia.
One of the most serious problem of US Foreign Policy has been not be able to govern the day after achieving short term goal, be it Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, or Yemen. And the same would be the case with Syria. Maybe someone in the Department of State finally figured out that even after spending Billions $ in Jordan we only had one soldier fighting against Assad. Let's work with him.
Peace is what we need, must help in stopping the killing of innocent men, women, and children, your solution will not.
10
Bottom line, it may be necessary, but it is not something we advocate for, especially on the front page of the NYTimes. Bury the piece, and this comment, in the back of your paper and hope it is quickly forgotten.
3
In like manner, and on the subject of buying people, why not offer some of the Republican candidates millions of dollars to convert to the other side or otherwise just disappear into the witness protection program. For under 100 million we could get rid of most of them.
That would be money well spent.
That would be money well spent.
3
Laurence B,
our president said he was a democrat if one can believe him, and he got us into seven (7) wars.
our president said he was a democrat if one can believe him, and he got us into seven (7) wars.
Given the U.S.'s record of bungling everything in the Middle East, Southeast Asia, and Latin America, it should just butt out. Full stop.
6
This would have been a good idea when the civil war started. Right now we need Assad's government to hold together as a bulwark against people even worse than he is. The peace negotiations are the only way to remove Assad from power and move forward IMO.
3
If Assad falls it will only precipitate another war to determine who fills the vacuum. And my money is not on the "moderate" forces whom we've been supporting. Anyway, for Assad to fall, Russia would have to agree, and it would only agree if its naval base were allowed to remain.
6
"Offer money and asylum to officers and officials who defect."
But we won't offer asylum to Syrian refugees who've already defected? You must be kidding.
But we won't offer asylum to Syrian refugees who've already defected? You must be kidding.
3
What, are you crazy?
Here are the results of undermining Assad:
1. Rampant ISIS
2. Near genocide of Christians in areas under ISIS control
3. Destruction of Aleppo
4. Destruction of Palmyra
5. Untold number of decapitations.
6. Tens of thousands dead
7. A migrant crisis
8. Ceding of leadership in the Near East to Russia
I cerrtainly hope we ignore your terrible advice. You make "curveball" look like a genius.
Here are the results of undermining Assad:
1. Rampant ISIS
2. Near genocide of Christians in areas under ISIS control
3. Destruction of Aleppo
4. Destruction of Palmyra
5. Untold number of decapitations.
6. Tens of thousands dead
7. A migrant crisis
8. Ceding of leadership in the Near East to Russia
I cerrtainly hope we ignore your terrible advice. You make "curveball" look like a genius.
10
These "defectors" have far too much blood on their hands. In any case the Russians will provide them with a safe haven and Assad still controls a large portion of the population. Russia has wanted a port on the Med for centuries and now they have one. By supporting Shiites from Iran to Lebanon the Russians can stir up trouble at will. Russia has, like the Soviet Union, become an army with a country. The military loves toys and adventures and is Putin's only possible rival for power. Anyone else is soon dead, and always in a way that everyone knows is state sanctioned. Within sight of the Kremlin walls, radiation poisoning etc. Minorities in Syria are much safer under Assad and there is no panic to leave.
This is a great idea. If collectively as a planet we cannot end the carnage in Syria - we are doomed.
The United States and Europe should focus on strategies that will ultimately defeat ISIS. The Syrian regime has not attacked the USA, and the Syrian people are involved in a civil war that needs to be resolved with one side or the other winning. So far, no one, including the US government, has been able to show that if the current Syrian government is dismantled, a democratic Western friendly government will replace it. Moreover, before this civil war started, the overwhelming majority of Syrians were in full support of destroying Israel and murdering all the Jews, and they were not supporters of the West. Syria was just one more Islamic country that had a more sectarian despot regime ruling a largely anti-western population.
There is no guarantee or even any reasonable expectation that helping to remove the Assad government will bring about a government that will be any better and there is a substantial risk that the country will end up like Iraq or Libya.
The USA and the West should focus on defeating ISIS and providing assistance to specific identifiable groups who truly want some semblance of a democratic government. Unless a viable replacement group is identified, replacing the Assad government should not be the priority of the USA or the West.
There is no guarantee or even any reasonable expectation that helping to remove the Assad government will bring about a government that will be any better and there is a substantial risk that the country will end up like Iraq or Libya.
The USA and the West should focus on defeating ISIS and providing assistance to specific identifiable groups who truly want some semblance of a democratic government. Unless a viable replacement group is identified, replacing the Assad government should not be the priority of the USA or the West.
3
This sounds like a marvelous idea. First, these men fight for a vicious regime and for a man we are on record as a country as opposing, then they begin to lose and now they want to come into our country, get a lump sum (or would that come first) and collect a stipend of a few thousand dollars a month.
I'm not sure which is more offensive. That they would have the gall to ask or that they may be right based on our past actions that their wish would be granted. We have been paying so many parts of the world to to not kill each other for decades. That's not to say that we aren't also doing this to protect our business interests.
It's insane. We pay group Aa which is a subset of group A bot to kill group Ab which is also a subset of group A. The first we give a group of 1,000 members 80 million dollars not to kill the second group which only has 500 members. But then the second group starts to retaliate with ever more disgusting killings to make up for their lack of funds and members so we start paying 85 million dollars to them to calm down. And on and on it goes.
Since 9/11 we had to wrap our heads around The Taliban and the century old grudge match between Sunni and Shia. Then AlQuaeda, the Quds, Muslim Brotherhood, Boko Harem, Isis, Wahhabism, blah, blah, blah. They are constantly popping up or morphing or merging and we have no idea who is running with who.
Snd your solution is to trust, pay and house now and verify later. State Dept response was right
I'm not sure which is more offensive. That they would have the gall to ask or that they may be right based on our past actions that their wish would be granted. We have been paying so many parts of the world to to not kill each other for decades. That's not to say that we aren't also doing this to protect our business interests.
It's insane. We pay group Aa which is a subset of group A bot to kill group Ab which is also a subset of group A. The first we give a group of 1,000 members 80 million dollars not to kill the second group which only has 500 members. But then the second group starts to retaliate with ever more disgusting killings to make up for their lack of funds and members so we start paying 85 million dollars to them to calm down. And on and on it goes.
Since 9/11 we had to wrap our heads around The Taliban and the century old grudge match between Sunni and Shia. Then AlQuaeda, the Quds, Muslim Brotherhood, Boko Harem, Isis, Wahhabism, blah, blah, blah. They are constantly popping up or morphing or merging and we have no idea who is running with who.
Snd your solution is to trust, pay and house now and verify later. State Dept response was right
1
No shortage of ideas on how to spend the US taxpayers money is there?
11
Hey the wackier the idea the more likely that first the Pentagon, and then the State Dept., will latch on to it. Why they could do just as they did during the Iraq War, just bale up 12 billion in 100 dollar bills and drop it on Demascus. Of course just as in Iraq, you will never see hide nor hair of a single dollar, and Assad will still stay in power.
1
Say what? Encourage Alawite military officers, collaborators in Assad's oppression, to defect? And to go where, exactly, the US? While we refuse to to allow legitimate Syrian refugees admittance? Reward perpetrators of oppression while refusing to help its victims?
I've got a better idea: help to fund a military coup of Assad. Encourage the disgruntled military to remain in Syria. They participated in making the bed, they deserve to sleep in it.
Mohammed Alaa Ghanem must have some old buddies in the Syrian army who want out, and who want to get paid for leaving. That's the only way his proposal makes any sense.
I've got a better idea: help to fund a military coup of Assad. Encourage the disgruntled military to remain in Syria. They participated in making the bed, they deserve to sleep in it.
Mohammed Alaa Ghanem must have some old buddies in the Syrian army who want out, and who want to get paid for leaving. That's the only way his proposal makes any sense.
2
Perfect idea .... leading to yet another power vacuum and greater instability in the middle east. Lay out the red carpet for Iran and Isis.
5
I've got a better idea! Offer me a bribe to leave the United States! The only people standing in the way of your brilliance are dupes like me. Get rid of people like me and you'll be well on your way to world domination! Seriously, you'll save in the long run and I am pretty sure--if the bribe is big enough---that even Canada would be willing to offer asylum.
11
To end Syria's war, the West should take Syria and Iraq, use the oil to pay for expenses while enforcing strict martial law. The purpose would be to stabilize the region and to promote the high moral value of individual liberty. Iraq and Syria would become a massive base of operations and influence for the West.
We need to stop acquiescing to the intolerance of Islam and the aggression of Russia. In one move, we take Russia's naval base on the Med, eliminate Assad and ISIS, remove Iran from both Iraq and Syria, protect Jordan, Israel and Egypt, place a giant thorn in Iran's side all while promoting the spread of individual liberty for all people including women, gays, Christians, etc.
Make it so.
We need to stop acquiescing to the intolerance of Islam and the aggression of Russia. In one move, we take Russia's naval base on the Med, eliminate Assad and ISIS, remove Iran from both Iraq and Syria, protect Jordan, Israel and Egypt, place a giant thorn in Iran's side all while promoting the spread of individual liberty for all people including women, gays, Christians, etc.
Make it so.
1
In other words you want world war three. You have not been following the news lately. The Russians are not the same Russians as they were under Yetsin, they are not backing down. They have proven that they are militarily a super power. Also the Putin doctrine ( yes not only American presidents can have doctrines) if it is war with the USA it will go nuclear. He has made that perfectly clear. So if you do not mind the USA being turned into a radioactive cinder, go ahead, try and move Russia out of Syria and take their naval base.
3
We already tried that in Iraq.
It's not a bad idea, and it's certainly not out of the ordinary, but how on earth will this end the Syrian civil war? With enough effort and resources you can certainly get some officers to defect, but not all of them, and how would it possibly be enough to make a big difference on such a complex battlefield? The weaker Assad gets, the more Russia will get involved, and soon you'll have Russian officers advising Syrian troops if need be. Considering how decimated Assad's army is already, it's hard to imagine how losing a few semi-loyal officers would make much difference.
4
The Saudis have all the money and they are in the same neighborhood, ask them. Assad and his father before him brought this upon themselves. Russia has been helping them, let that continue, Putin will look large.
1
Except for the fact that the Saudi Arabia is dominated by the Wahhabi strain of Islam that views Alawites as heretics deserving of death - which suggests an uncomfortable welcome for Assad's henchman to say the least - great idea.
Many in the region have been bought off in the past, it was part of our successful surge strategy in Iraq, but that is a temporary solution, as we also saw in Iraq. As President Sadat once observed: except for Egypt, the Arabs are just tribes with flags. And therein lies the problem. Political correctness aside, we pretend we are dealing with European-style nation states when we are not. Misdiagnosing the illness always leads to prescribing the wrong treatment.
Many in the region have been bought off in the past, it was part of our successful surge strategy in Iraq, but that is a temporary solution, as we also saw in Iraq. As President Sadat once observed: except for Egypt, the Arabs are just tribes with flags. And therein lies the problem. Political correctness aside, we pretend we are dealing with European-style nation states when we are not. Misdiagnosing the illness always leads to prescribing the wrong treatment.
5
The Obama Administration has so far saved thousands of precious lives of American troops by not sending them into the Syrian meat grinder and it can defeat an enemy using greenbacks in a very cunning way. Diplomacy is not a sign of weakness especially in a country like ours which is armed to the teeth and can destroy the world ten times over with the touch of a button. I just don't understand why Rubio claims he will make America strong again if elected. What president said "speak with a soft voice but carry a big stick."
5
First we had the Saudi minister's oped piece and now we have the Syrian opposition's oped piece. When will the editors learn not to support fools' errands? Have we not learned from the regime change debacles in Iraq, Libya, Tunisia, Egypt and Yemen? We are the principal instigators of a destabilized Arab world. Why end with Syria? Why not include the Gulf states, those corrupt self-appointed monarchies? Is the NYT so aligned with Israel in this quest for regional destruction with Israel the exception?
Those of us intimately familiar with the psychology and culture of the Arab world shake our heads. Only now it's with disgust; disbelief was abandoned long ago.
Those of us intimately familiar with the psychology and culture of the Arab world shake our heads. Only now it's with disgust; disbelief was abandoned long ago.
16
I'd like to see opinion pieces, also open for comments, from the Russian and Syrian foreign ministers, also open for comments please and given the same prominence.
5
Great letter Baboulas, right on.
1
I think the U.S. has done enough to destablize the Middle East. Let's start thinking about how we can play a constructive role in bringing the parties together to resolve the issues.
2
The best way to bring the parties together is for the US to just leave the area. The USA is not the solution to the problem, the USA is the problem.
1
Offer money? Violate our own laws on defectors and asylum? No thanks. News flash. We would be outraged if Russia did the same to us. And, Syrian officers and their families are largely immune to the deprivations of sanctions.
This is another Zarkawieske idea, to float around and see which sucker gobbles it up, create a mess, disappear, to later claim an honest lack of knowledge. Recent history has proved that only a dictator can hold any Middle East country together. Hence, making Assad the only viable long term solution, for good or bad.
3
Who want politicians who offer them to the highest bidder? And we are talking about politicians proven to be incompetent and disastrous.
No, no, no. The way to end the war and all middle east wars is simply to suspend religion! That's it. Nothing more. No more sunnis and shites and all the rest of that stuff that is meaningless. They all think God is on their side. We shoujld bring everyone home and be done with, oil or no oil.
How much money did we pay to the Sunnis to help buy their support for help mitigating the insurgency in Iraq? This was at a time when after bribes, an enormous refugee exodus, and massive ethnic cleansing that we were told the success was due to the "surge". Surge of money was more like it. Enough of bribing murderers and criminals with our hard earned tax dollars, We can't even fund our own schools or fix our roads and bridges.
1
The problem is with Obama's foreign policy doctrine of hands off and talk big but carry a noodle stick. He had such advice and more from his generals and CIA To be moe proactive if he is serious about stopping the blood shed and promoting American values and interests in the region. His failure to keep his word when Assad gasd his people killing thousands, was a shameful act by a super power advocating freedom, liberty and justice. It embolden the criminal regime to continue its killing and destruction of Syria. It embolden Putin to invade Ukraine and steel Crimea island. Russian forces are in Syria to protect the Assad regime and ensure the survival of their naval base in the Mediterranean Sea. They added some Air bases as well to their presence in the region. Meanwhile, our president is deeply concerned and proactive about gay rights in Africa and what's happening in Southern Sudan. It is unfortunate for the Syrian people that they were not born black or they were not in Africa. Their tragedy would have received considerably more attention and action from our president and from Holywood's movie stars.
2
Buying off and sheltering war criminals who have used chemical weapons and barrel bombs against their own civilian populations might send the wrong message to the world and compromise the United States' standing as a legitimate mediator in any Syrian peace process (or in any other/broader disputes in the Middle East or throughout the world)
1
In Iraq at least $12,000,000,000 disappeared, and probably much more, to be used for general graft and corruption. Buying allegiances and rescuing people in the Middle East with the tax dollars of working Americans has to be a really strange idea for the NYTimes to advocate for. However, if our Mint could just print up the extra billions, during off hours, needed to "help buy peace", maybe it's a good idea.
Of course, we could print up billions of dollars to secretly help the poor. They would receive the cash in shrink wrapped bundles, maybe around Christmas time. The money could be used for housing, education, and healthcare, things that millions of Americans desperately need help with.
Of course, we could print up billions of dollars to secretly help the poor. They would receive the cash in shrink wrapped bundles, maybe around Christmas time. The money could be used for housing, education, and healthcare, things that millions of Americans desperately need help with.
1
This sounds like the whisperings of Chalabi to the G W Bush administration. Why would we want to allow high-ranking military officers of our sort of 'enemy' Assad administration to move to America. These are the guys who helped Assad crush the Syrian version of the Arab Spring. Taking these guys in would be awful for our own security. They were never friends of America and might well lead attacks from inside the United States. If we want to rescue people from the conflicts in Iraq and Syria, we should help the translators who actually took a risk to help us in Iraq and who, along with their families, remain at risk in Iraq.
Partition is a solution. The Alawites are centered in NW Syria, centered around Latakia, in what was an independent French-administered state for two decades. This is also the area where the Russian bases are located, so it makes a realistic division of spheres of influence. This could become an independent state and Assad and his officers could take refuge there, under Russian protection. That allows for establishment of a Sunni state in the rest of Iraq.
Partition is a solution. The Alawites are centered in NW Syria, centered around Latakia, in what was an independent French-administered state for two decades. This is also the area where the Russian bases are located, so it makes a realistic division of spheres of influence. This could become an independent state and Assad and his officers could take refuge there, under Russian protection. That allows for establishment of a Sunni state in the rest of Iraq.
3
Helping one of Killer Assad's top officers who assisted in his murder of over 100,000 of his own people rather than give up power, or at least allow some modicum of democracy, would be like bribing Eichmann or Himmler to leave Hitler in the middle of World War II.
It might make a bit of sense to a deranged mind to overlook mass murder and the destruction of entire cities, and works if you're a sociopath, but I can't imagine it's something that any of the western democracies would care to indulge in.
All these monsters should eventually be captured and sent to The Hague for trial as war criminals and mass murderers.
It might make a bit of sense to a deranged mind to overlook mass murder and the destruction of entire cities, and works if you're a sociopath, but I can't imagine it's something that any of the western democracies would care to indulge in.
All these monsters should eventually be captured and sent to The Hague for trial as war criminals and mass murderers.
3
Yes, when in doubt, buy stuff: even people. It's the American way.
2
So using American taxpayer dollars to suborn officials in the middle east will bring peace? Who knew? We could have saved most of the trillions that we spent and continue to spend invading and bombing the place.
2
Assad is a leader straight out of classical antiquity. The West's meddling in a cultural system that has existed for millennia is pure madness. Rome, for all its extreme brutality, did not change a thing. "Mithradates, he died old" - a more recent example of a despot pressed.
1
This is a joke right?
The United States is supposed to end Syria's war by helping Assad's military leaders defect (to the USA) and bring more of Syria's problems to our shores?
Yeah, great. Because we all know there would be NO repercussions. ISIS operatives, pro-Assad Syrians wouldn't enter Obama's open borders or pose as "migrants" to get here and kill Syrian military defectors. And heck, Assad wouldn't possibly retaliate by sending sleeper cells to OUR country.
We are not the world's police, something Barack Obama declared as a candidate and simply failed to deliver on as President. With my mortgage and graduate school debt payments, and a short month of February, I am a little short on cash until my tax refund.
Maybe I will just turn to some other country to fix my problems for me?
Seriously. I wish you the best of luck, but it's time for Syria to solve Syria.
The United States is supposed to end Syria's war by helping Assad's military leaders defect (to the USA) and bring more of Syria's problems to our shores?
Yeah, great. Because we all know there would be NO repercussions. ISIS operatives, pro-Assad Syrians wouldn't enter Obama's open borders or pose as "migrants" to get here and kill Syrian military defectors. And heck, Assad wouldn't possibly retaliate by sending sleeper cells to OUR country.
We are not the world's police, something Barack Obama declared as a candidate and simply failed to deliver on as President. With my mortgage and graduate school debt payments, and a short month of February, I am a little short on cash until my tax refund.
Maybe I will just turn to some other country to fix my problems for me?
Seriously. I wish you the best of luck, but it's time for Syria to solve Syria.
5
American citizens are waking up to the fact that they do not want to be the world's great manipulators or frankly, chumps. We have plenty to do that is constructive and important here in the United States not to mention all the money Europe's spending on refugees, all because there was and continues to be a failed overthrow of Assad in Syria. And I'm sorry, but no, the United States government should not be in the business of paying people to betray their leadership. If these people want to defect for altruistic reasons, fine, but to pay them? What kind of people need to be paid to switch sides? Mercenaries, and no we're not paying anybody. Syria must have a diplomatic solution, not a pay-to-betray program.
4
I find it impossible to avoid the conclusion that everything the American government does in the middle east (as well as the British and French) leads to greater disintegration, increases the serious problems or creates new problems. Washington should not continue doing things that add to the disintegration, and this includes starting a new campaign to bribe Syrian officials to seek asylum in America. Further, given the American track record on promises of asylum to those who have trusted us (consider the abandoned Vietnamese who supported America, or the abandoned Iraqis who worked with America during the occupation there), what Syrian official in his or her right mind would trust such an offer?
Further entanglements do not good policy make, and a consistent the track record that tells us so. The better policy is to disentangle, not to look for new entanglements.
Further entanglements do not good policy make, and a consistent the track record that tells us so. The better policy is to disentangle, not to look for new entanglements.
18
The article almost has it right. But they reach the wrong conclusion. When Assad started attacking his own people, many of his mid and high level military officials left. But my sources (English language news outlets from the Middle East) suggest that more of them have stayed in Syria and led grassroots battles against Assad. They've begged the West for help - to no avail, because their priority is to take out Assad first, and then daesh second; while the West wants the opposite.
.
At a time when more and more people are convinced that solving the problems in Syria, will require boots on the ground - these guys are already doing it. They could be hugely valuable if, instead of encouraging them to defect and move to the US, we supported their ground war at home. And it wouldn't be hard to do. We could encourage male Syrian refugees to spirit their wives, children, and elderly parents to safety outside the country, train, and go back to Syria under the leadership of these Syrian officers, to take back their country. The US and allies could provide air and logistical support. It would solve a lot of problems that simply encouraging Syrian generals to defect, won't do.
.
The hard sell of such a plan would be in the West. With everyone focused on daesh as a threat, which it is, it would be difficult to convince us to go along with the Freedom Fighters' Asad- first approach. But I fear that it may be the only way to solve Syria.
.
At a time when more and more people are convinced that solving the problems in Syria, will require boots on the ground - these guys are already doing it. They could be hugely valuable if, instead of encouraging them to defect and move to the US, we supported their ground war at home. And it wouldn't be hard to do. We could encourage male Syrian refugees to spirit their wives, children, and elderly parents to safety outside the country, train, and go back to Syria under the leadership of these Syrian officers, to take back their country. The US and allies could provide air and logistical support. It would solve a lot of problems that simply encouraging Syrian generals to defect, won't do.
.
The hard sell of such a plan would be in the West. With everyone focused on daesh as a threat, which it is, it would be difficult to convince us to go along with the Freedom Fighters' Asad- first approach. But I fear that it may be the only way to solve Syria.
4
The biggest reason that Americas first priority is to take out ISIS is because we already know what we were dealing with with Assad. Assad was obviously not the greatest leader to his own people but he kept the status quo in the Middle East and unlike other leaders over there, he was willing to crack down on extremism in his country. This situation is almost identical to that of what went down with Saddam Hussein in Iraq.
1
While it's an imperative that there should be trust between the negotiating parties meeting at Geneva to seek solution to the Syrian crisis, the suggestion being offered to enhance the US leverage in negotiations is just the opposite,I.e. pushing the regime change in Syria through engineering defections. Why blame Russia then if it's committed to save the Assad regime at any cost?
2
The Syrian war is not a war of US making. Yes, Obama deepened the crisis by arming, funding and training unvetted rebels, but it is nit our war. As such, it is unfathomable why we should consider giving a monthly salary to any Syrian much less offer them "temporary" amnesty. The author's Syrian American Council should properly direct its request to Saudia Arabia, one of the parties destabilizing Syria. And while they're on the phone, please ask the Saudis to take in a million or so refugees (even one would be symbolic) and pony up the mere pittance ($60 million) it pledged to support refugee camps in Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan.
40
@SW
Why is it that most Republicans & neocons and even some red Democrats do not understand the role Saudia and Turkey are playing in Syria.
Well said.
Why is it that most Republicans & neocons and even some red Democrats do not understand the role Saudia and Turkey are playing in Syria.
Well said.
4
It was surprising to know about US State Department's response; "Apply for a visa and follow the normal procedure." Whether it was administrative error or political decision is not sure but hopefully in future they will take the necessary measures to encourage the defectors.
1
If the US hasn't learned the consequences of its fools-gold pursuit of regime change in Iraq following GWB's horrific misadventure, then it is unimaginably obtuse. This is my money that Mr. Alaa Ghanem writing about, and I am not about to spend it to reward war criminals for saving their own skin.
If, heaven forbid, the Assad side were to show definitive signs of victory, US taxpayer supported "defectors" would slip back over the front line to gas babies and barrel-bomb innocent civilians again with our dollars stuffed into their pockets.
Not only would such a move be a complete waste of money; worse, it would also make us complicit in the genocidal slaughter of a murderous regime. No thanks.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
If, heaven forbid, the Assad side were to show definitive signs of victory, US taxpayer supported "defectors" would slip back over the front line to gas babies and barrel-bomb innocent civilians again with our dollars stuffed into their pockets.
Not only would such a move be a complete waste of money; worse, it would also make us complicit in the genocidal slaughter of a murderous regime. No thanks.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
16
The idea of mediating a civil war with more than 250,000 casualties is absurd. The Union would not have accepted British or French mediation of the Civil War in 1864, nor should Damascus or the rebels or ISIS or the Kurds. The only moral path is to pick a side, back it and make it a winner, then post victory encourage the winner to be magnanimous. We did not try and reconcile the ANC and the Boers in South Africa, and we did not tell the Kosovars and Serbs to hold it together - why try this in Syria? Our failure, and the failure of Clinton and Obama was in NOT picking and backing a winner that shared our values in some small way, and letting the situation deteriorate to the point where no side shares our values or deserves our backing. Partition is the only step, short of total victory for the regime, that can have any meaningful or lasting result that is even near to 'peace'.
@John
With your theory I guess if President Obama and President Clinton did the wrong things; The president in the middle happens to be a Republican and you do not want to name him, I wonder why?
In order to analyse any situation if you take a major part of the puzzle out, you will not reach a sane solution. Most of what we see in Middle East is the doing of President Bush.
Post 9-11 he authorised the departure of all Osama Bin Laden's family from the US even before we could figure out what has happened, I wonder why?
He authorised the invasion of Iraq, and the results are evident to all. His team disbanded the standing army of Iraq; a significant number of terrorists are former Iraqi Army; etc.
Let us get our facts correct before we start blaming POTUS.
In order to fix Syria, We need to distant ourselves from the Saudis and their extremist ideology that is being followed by all the so called Muslim Extremist organization in the world.
With your theory I guess if President Obama and President Clinton did the wrong things; The president in the middle happens to be a Republican and you do not want to name him, I wonder why?
In order to analyse any situation if you take a major part of the puzzle out, you will not reach a sane solution. Most of what we see in Middle East is the doing of President Bush.
Post 9-11 he authorised the departure of all Osama Bin Laden's family from the US even before we could figure out what has happened, I wonder why?
He authorised the invasion of Iraq, and the results are evident to all. His team disbanded the standing army of Iraq; a significant number of terrorists are former Iraqi Army; etc.
Let us get our facts correct before we start blaming POTUS.
In order to fix Syria, We need to distant ourselves from the Saudis and their extremist ideology that is being followed by all the so called Muslim Extremist organization in the world.
4
No.
Not a dime of US money to Assad's mercenaries, no safe haven in middle America for his henchmen.
No.
Syria will collapse when Putin can no longer use it to distract the Russian people.
ISIS will collapse when Saudi Arabia stops funding them.
Syria and ISIS are not the existential threats to the United States that neoconservative thinking, sabre rattling GOP candidates and opportunistic grifters from the Middle East sponsored think tanks would have us believe.
Not a dime of US money to Assad's mercenaries, no safe haven in middle America for his henchmen.
No.
Syria will collapse when Putin can no longer use it to distract the Russian people.
ISIS will collapse when Saudi Arabia stops funding them.
Syria and ISIS are not the existential threats to the United States that neoconservative thinking, sabre rattling GOP candidates and opportunistic grifters from the Middle East sponsored think tanks would have us believe.
10
Come on, the powers that be who stole and cheated their way to said power want and love war, power and war profiteering. It's sort of like a news organization pretending to represent truth while printing what the money tells them to be truth. Our so called leaders have long ago lost their way along with what little journalism was left on the planet as these same so called leaders now control journalism world wide. Murdoch is everywhere. One thing is clear without real journalism, Money and Madness will continue rule the planet and the sheep continue drinking from the trough of lies.
24
I'm a US taxpayer. The US through the CIA has dumped billions of dollars into Syria, Iraq and Libya in bribes arms and training. The US has inflamed this civil wars and the destructive refugee crisis they have created exactly because we have used, weapons, money and training to get leverage.
During the Iraq war the US filled transport plans with billons of dollars in cash that disappeared. That was also US taxpayer money.
It's time we stopped arming, training and providing funds for any of these civil conflicts. It doesn't solve the problem, it fuels it.
During the Iraq war the US filled transport plans with billons of dollars in cash that disappeared. That was also US taxpayer money.
It's time we stopped arming, training and providing funds for any of these civil conflicts. It doesn't solve the problem, it fuels it.
79
Just to set the record straight about the supposed billions of dollars of our taxpayer money was lost or stolen in I Iraq. A former student of mine was a sargeant that flew with that money into Baghdad. He took pictures of the pallets going on the transport, while on the transport and going off the transport. He never saw the money again. He showed the pictures to me and the pallets were huge with wads of hundred dollar bills. The money belonged to Iraq not the USA.
If Assad falls, ISIS will be in control. There is zero probability of an American puppet regime in Syria. We tried that in Iraq and several other countries before that. We should stop picking winners and losers in conflicts we don't understand.
31
"To End Syria’s War,...."
.....and then what? A Syrian government run by Hezbollah? Isis? This war is horrible, and the refugee crisis is unbearable. But when will we learn that in the Middle East, US intervention to "fix" a country typically leads to something far, far worse. Have we not learned from Iraq, Libya, Egypt? As difficult as this sounds, I think we've done enough. Let them sort this one out, with Russia and Iran as backers.
.....and then what? A Syrian government run by Hezbollah? Isis? This war is horrible, and the refugee crisis is unbearable. But when will we learn that in the Middle East, US intervention to "fix" a country typically leads to something far, far worse. Have we not learned from Iraq, Libya, Egypt? As difficult as this sounds, I think we've done enough. Let them sort this one out, with Russia and Iran as backers.
16
$3 billion for what? We cannot buy peace.
3
You are correct, $3 Billion is peanuts, we haven't bought peace in the Middle East by providing over $4.5 Billion each year to our so called ally, Israel;
2
We tried this, even if clandestinely, years ago, when some of Assad’s officers DID begin to defect. But they stopped doing so not because of any cessation of enticements by us but because we stopped putting the pressure on Assad that convinced potential defectors that they needed to jump a sinking ship. All indications today are that Assad’s ship, equipped with powerful Russian baling pumps, isn’t about to sink anytime soon. Why should someone abandon home and culture if he doesn’t need to do so to survive?
This op-ed assumes that the only way to end the Syrian nightmare is to finally topple Assad. That ship sailed years ago; and with enhanced Iranian and Russian support these days, it’s very unlikely that this is the region’s or the world’s best option to stabilize Syria. It now appears that no Syrian solution that eventually squeezes out ISIS can be imposed that doesn’t include some role for Assad.
If that’s true, then seeking to entice his officers to defect is a bootless distraction that complicates efforts to build a meaningful alliance that helps neutralize ISIS and creates safe zones within Syria within which displaced Syrians can reboot shattered lives.
Why should Assad talk to or cooperate with anyone who was helping his officers to defect?
This op-ed assumes that the only way to end the Syrian nightmare is to finally topple Assad. That ship sailed years ago; and with enhanced Iranian and Russian support these days, it’s very unlikely that this is the region’s or the world’s best option to stabilize Syria. It now appears that no Syrian solution that eventually squeezes out ISIS can be imposed that doesn’t include some role for Assad.
If that’s true, then seeking to entice his officers to defect is a bootless distraction that complicates efforts to build a meaningful alliance that helps neutralize ISIS and creates safe zones within Syria within which displaced Syrians can reboot shattered lives.
Why should Assad talk to or cooperate with anyone who was helping his officers to defect?
12
To End Syria's War, An Even Better Option : Let's stop sending military equipment to the so-called Syrian opposition. ISIS will stop bombing civilians, Turkey will stop trying to start a war with Russia, and the refugees will stop flooding Europe. Who can seriously think that having statues of Mr. Assad's father destroyed is worth the nightmare that is going on there ?
30
It is tragic that the big powers are continuing to destroy the Middle East, because they do not understand them and like the way they form governments.
This destablization will go down in history as yet another great game blunder of the big powers.
This destablization will go down in history as yet another great game blunder of the big powers.
21
find a graceful way to retreat, including safety for non Isis rebel forces and make peace with Assad. He's not a monster like Hussein was.
7
Assad's use of nerve gas on citizens is monstrous.
1
1
We might as well encourage army officers and government officials to abandon the Assad government. Nothing else has worked. Perhaps we can get our stalwart Congress to establish and fund a “Department of Syrian Defections.”
3
The Syrian defectors could be put up in luxury housing while enjoying "temporary" amnesty and waiting for their monthly "salary" to be deposited in their bank accounts, all the while tens of millions of Americans pray that their EARNED social security check will be enough to buy food and medicine.
7
Or, we could create a PEACE DEPARTMENT, that could continually monitor the world's potential hotspots and step in BEFORE things erupt. Composed of people not invested in war, but rather, in peaceful solutions and amicable outcomes. Members with a knowledge of, and respect for, different cultures, forms of government, etc..
3
Lots of bitterness here and it is well deserved. It is no longer valid to say, "I don't care what you do but do something."
Actually, it is simpler and cheaper than what Mr. Ghanem suggests: guarantee the safety of the Alawites and the Druses, whom the Sunnis hate and would exterminate if Assad left. Assad, an Alawite himself, has a responsibility for his coreligionists, whom he seeks to protect from extermination. The US has ignored this factor for far too long, and this is very much an important reason why the Syrian mess exists.
3
This recommendation comes a few years late. The writer said it himself, why would they defect now that the tide has turned? Bashar, thanks to Russia, have the upper hand again, why would anyone defect and risk his life, the safety of his loved ones and his future ( defect to go where? ). Too late my friend.
Terrible idea. How could anyone think of such a ludicrous plan at a time when no one knows who to trust in the Syrian conflict?
19
Brilliant recommendation. Just another example of the stupid thinking that has led to the current problems in Syria which has become a festering sore affecting much of the world negatively. As is typical with much commentary on Syria, Assad is set up as the cause of all of this and with his removal all will be well. Really? For starters, what replaces the Assad government and what assurances are there that it would be better? Why do so many in the U.S., and especially in the government, feel that they should be involved in determining who governs in other countries? Recent experience suggests they have no idea what they are talking about and, in any case, are not motivated by high ideals but rather perceived self-interest.
50
These supporters of Assad are no more than gangsters, just like he is. So you want to give each of these gangsters a million dollars and invite them to come to the USA to spend their ill gotten gains?
What's your end game here?
It's been historically proven that every time we initiate a regime change it causes blowback that costs the American people billions of dollars and often thousands of lives. Who is going to run Syria when Assad is gone? The less we middle in other peoples affairs, governance and culture the better.
What's your end game here?
It's been historically proven that every time we initiate a regime change it causes blowback that costs the American people billions of dollars and often thousands of lives. Who is going to run Syria when Assad is gone? The less we middle in other peoples affairs, governance and culture the better.
18
So these guys aren't so much a military as a bunch of mercenaries? In that case, what happens when we stop paying them? Presumably they'll find someone else to hire them to fight. Say, ISIS.
4
This is a very 'cleave'r idea- yes, let's reward the Syrian diplomats, and officers who are part of the murderous regime by bringing them to the US. Let's give them money, housing, and whatever else they need.
How about consulting with the American people, the majority of whom, don't want any Syrian refugees entering the country.
How about consulting with the American people, the majority of whom, don't want any Syrian refugees entering the country.
8
This is just ISIS propaganda to cause the Syrian army to collapse so thew can take over Syria.
2
These officers should be tried for crimes against humanity, never be given asylum, money and protection by the USA. Any such offer will open the floodgates for dictators around the world to commit horrible crimes and just wait for the offer of asylum to come when things turn bad.
2
"...and hasten Mr. Assad's downfall"
And who would replace him? ISIS? The author doesn't mention this group's presence in Syria and its role as a major sponsor of terrorism throughout the World.
And who would replace him? ISIS? The author doesn't mention this group's presence in Syria and its role as a major sponsor of terrorism throughout the World.
31
@Mike Edwards
If you are funded by the same people who fund ISIS, why would you criticise them?
It is all about Saudi Money and their version of Hearts and mind conversion in the US.
It is being funded by the same extremists who are bombing women and children in Yemen, who have bombed at least three MSF facilities in Yemen.
If you are funded by the same people who fund ISIS, why would you criticise them?
It is all about Saudi Money and their version of Hearts and mind conversion in the US.
It is being funded by the same extremists who are bombing women and children in Yemen, who have bombed at least three MSF facilities in Yemen.
3
Ohh....Its an opinion only......Btw who is this bloke Mohammed Alaa Ghanem ??? and an op-ed on nytimes ???
6
Methinks the NYT is putting out another trial balloon for the inept administration.
Turkish agent perhaps?
2
Why would you want America to provide this? Perhaps your idea will fall on receptive ears in say RUSSIA?
Should we have offered money to Nazi's to defect too?
4
Actually the USA did just that. Without German Scientists, who were Nazis by the way, the US space program would not have gotten off the ground.
1
The thought, of a Syrian post Bashar al-Assad transitional unified government is fanciful. Psychotic power hungry Sunnis after having solidified their power would set out to crush every last Alawite. Faction by faction, area by area, city by city; radical power hungry Islamists would then turn on each other.
Syrian Sunnis consider the Alawites illegitimate, oppressive, anti-Islamic, secular, wine drinking, women unveiled Infidels.
Religiously; Al-Assad’s minority Alawites (At 4.3 million only a fraction of the total Syrian population.) are Shia/Mystic with a touch of Christianity - contacts with Byzantines and Crusaders early on added later Roman Christian elements. They even have their own Triune God story. They were given control of the country by the French after World War I. Then over the years they solidified their hold on the key government posts, the military, and the limited natural resources.
Islam on all sides has to solve this problem.
www.InquiryAbraham.com
Syrian Sunnis consider the Alawites illegitimate, oppressive, anti-Islamic, secular, wine drinking, women unveiled Infidels.
Religiously; Al-Assad’s minority Alawites (At 4.3 million only a fraction of the total Syrian population.) are Shia/Mystic with a touch of Christianity - contacts with Byzantines and Crusaders early on added later Roman Christian elements. They even have their own Triune God story. They were given control of the country by the French after World War I. Then over the years they solidified their hold on the key government posts, the military, and the limited natural resources.
Islam on all sides has to solve this problem.
www.InquiryAbraham.com
4
Stop spending US cash taken from taxpayers and their descendants (since we'll just print it or borrow it) on members of failed states. The senior military and security "officials" were part of Assad's regime and don't deserve any reward beyond performing "odd jobs".
The Assads (Bashar and Hafez) were tyrants. The military officials working for them are of the same flavor. And US cash should be devoted to making US lives in the US better.
The Assads (Bashar and Hafez) were tyrants. The military officials working for them are of the same flavor. And US cash should be devoted to making US lives in the US better.
2
I'm sorry, but we are turning away children fleeing drug violence to our south, falling to feed and educate the poor, poisoning our own children. And we are going to shelter former henchman from a dictatorial regime, from a region with a history of embedding terrorist cells here because . . .? Somehow there won't be any blowback on our own soil?
4
Sounds great on the surface, but is filled with risk. The obvious first risk is determining who might be a genuine defector; who might be a defector of convenience (i.e., no real change in allegiance, but just wishing to get out while the getting is good); and who might be a double agent. The second risk is that if the Assad regime falls, the place will descend into chaos as did Libya after Qaddafi. The latter is not a reason in and of itself to leave a vicious dictator in place, but it should raise red flags about doing that without extensive planning for next steps.
4
Mohammed Alaa Ghanem urges the US to use material incentives to persuad Bashar al-Assad's military top shots to defect. He proposes the CIA "to provide temporary asylum and two payments: a lump sum delivered to defectors immediately after they abandon Mr. Assad, and then a monthly salary of a few thousand dollars." Are they worth it?
He also says this "would help the United States increase its leverage during the Geneva talks, and hasten Mr. Assad’s downfall." I suppose in military sense it shouldn't be difficult to bomb Damascus and get rid of the Butcher and his helpers. However unsavoury the idea is, to keep him in power, the question is what happens once he is gone. No doubt he is losing his popularity among his own Alawite communities. But he is not the only problem. ISIS is posing a bigger threat. But the Turks, the Sunni Arabs and the fighter groups they support, all see Assad's departure as their first priority. It explains why the Syrian peace talks are leading to nowhere.
He also says this "would help the United States increase its leverage during the Geneva talks, and hasten Mr. Assad’s downfall." I suppose in military sense it shouldn't be difficult to bomb Damascus and get rid of the Butcher and his helpers. However unsavoury the idea is, to keep him in power, the question is what happens once he is gone. No doubt he is losing his popularity among his own Alawite communities. But he is not the only problem. ISIS is posing a bigger threat. But the Turks, the Sunni Arabs and the fighter groups they support, all see Assad's departure as their first priority. It explains why the Syrian peace talks are leading to nowhere.
3
Assad and what is left of his government-institutions are,right now, the only solid things in Syria and the disastrous error was from the very beginning to topple Assad,may we like Assad or not.Unfortunately,the complexities in Syria were so profound that the so-called "Arab Springs" could only put the country on a degradation path.Not every country is prepared for western style democracies and is tragically erroneous to think that democracies can efficiently regulate every political environment.
64
There is no monetary value to the corporate war machine in just walking away, so no one ever recommends it in these pages. But it really is an option we should consider. If we don't have any clue what 'winning' looks like, we should stop pretending we are making efforts toward doing so.
5
A loss for Assad is victory for ISIS. Remember when we deposed Saddam? (Thanks, W. ) How did that turn out?
Leave Assad alone for now.
Leave Assad alone for now.
32
Don't forget Libya, where Obama had his "mission accomplished" moment then walked away knowing with absolute certainty that he would do nothing to stabilize that country as AQ and and later ISiS stepped in to reign terror all over the continent. Obama had the benefit of looking at Bush's colossal Iraq mistake under a microscopic and yet he did the very same thing in Libya.
2
why should america (ie. the american people) pay for the defections of officers from the government army?
why is america short changing the kurds, who are the only SECULAR force successfully fighting the islamic state fighters?
why does america do everything wrong and wind up creating and succoring movements like IS?
why is america short changing the kurds, who are the only SECULAR force successfully fighting the islamic state fighters?
why does america do everything wrong and wind up creating and succoring movements like IS?
12
But what happens when they are offered more money to stay?
Money cannot buy love.
Money cannot buy love.
1
We have no right to interfere in another country's civil war. What if another country had interfered in our own Civil War. Assad has a lot of support in Syria. And he is fighting against different terrorist groups that we should absolutely not be supporting.
24
Even if all the top corp of officers and families defected,
their positions would be filled by Iranian, or Lebanese military
personnel. That would be the worst of all worlds and
guarantee Assad remains in power forever.
their positions would be filled by Iranian, or Lebanese military
personnel. That would be the worst of all worlds and
guarantee Assad remains in power forever.
We need to end our participation in the Syrian conflict. It is Saudi Arabia's war, not ours. Just like other leaders we have disastrously deposed, I don't see that Mr. Assad is any worse than any of the other leaders. I see him as one more notch in the belt of those wishing to control the distribution of oil and gas in the region, further the interests of multinational corporations that does not benefit those people in that region or of the ordinary American. Let's get out of the Middle East, and take care of our own crumbling infrastructure and the vast needs of the American people. Enough is enough!
81
Have we learned nothing!? It is hard to fathom how our "leaders" think that they should become involved in enticing or paying anyone to commit treason. What would our reaction be if we discovered that a country was paying our "officers" to defect?
I have yet to hear from anyone a credible argument relating to "regime change" in Syria that doesn't rely on magical thinking about the burgeoning of democracy from a stew of relgious fanatics in which one group is worse than the other in terms of human rights, violence and freedom. Assad may be "Russia's" dictator instead of ours but I have very little doubt that nothing he has allegedly done will not be topped in cruelty by whatever comes after him.
We have no place effecting regime change in other countries. It is arrogant to do so. On the other hand, we have evey right to refuse to support theocrats or dictators with our treasure or our military and yet we do so everyday. A few examples of this folly are Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE and a slew of dictators in the rest of Africa and the Far East.
We should "export" democracy by example but that is becoming harder and harder to do as our "democracy" morphs into a oligarchy.
I have yet to hear from anyone a credible argument relating to "regime change" in Syria that doesn't rely on magical thinking about the burgeoning of democracy from a stew of relgious fanatics in which one group is worse than the other in terms of human rights, violence and freedom. Assad may be "Russia's" dictator instead of ours but I have very little doubt that nothing he has allegedly done will not be topped in cruelty by whatever comes after him.
We have no place effecting regime change in other countries. It is arrogant to do so. On the other hand, we have evey right to refuse to support theocrats or dictators with our treasure or our military and yet we do so everyday. A few examples of this folly are Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE and a slew of dictators in the rest of Africa and the Far East.
We should "export" democracy by example but that is becoming harder and harder to do as our "democracy" morphs into a oligarchy.
139
there is idealism and practicality. Assad is refusing humanitarian aid to those still in Syria and starving. At this point - whatever brings aid to those in Syria, I support. The rest can be a longer term goal. I 100% agree that our history of arrogance and involvement in regime change is reprehensible.
It's hard to get past the first sentence here - Fraught with what, one might ask. Deceit, pardons for genocidal policies, the exodus of those who created the disaster to some warm paradise, the grim reality of having to rebuild a whole nation, the tragedy of the vanishing of UNESCO sites.
Whatever comes out of the tragedy now, with its historic numbers of refugees and deaths, the assistance provided to a small group of Syrian military personnel hardly seems worth the space this editorial takes up on the page. The end game is clear - make the path a little easier for the perpetrators of the madness.
Whatever comes out of the tragedy now, with its historic numbers of refugees and deaths, the assistance provided to a small group of Syrian military personnel hardly seems worth the space this editorial takes up on the page. The end game is clear - make the path a little easier for the perpetrators of the madness.
33
The US doesn't want the war to end, unless it ends their way. In the meantime, people die.
Negotiations without preconditions, please.
Negotiations without preconditions, please.
4
Assad is the worst scar on human dignity in the current history. He is responsible for half million Syrian deaths, 6 to 8 million internally and externally displaced civilians, and this tyrant/despot is responsible for the destruction of entire Syrian civilization. Worst thing is Assad's perception in the 'west' as a lesser evil and some folks consider him 'democratic' and 'modernistic'. Rise of dreadful 'Daesh' is a consequence of world's failure to remove Assad from power. Syrians are bombed/butchered/crucified by Russia, Iran/Hezbollah, US/'west', Israel, and Daesh on daily basis. For nearly four and a half years Assad is committing a genocide of Syrian folks with absolute impunity. This entire 'middle east' region is en-flamed and ripples of this conflict have spread to Lebanon, Istanbul, Jakarta, and Paris. World leaders have failed to resolve this conflict to the dismay of Syrian folks and it's failure is causing utmost frustration for conscientious folks around the globe. It's such a shame we live in such a callous world!!!!
1
total malarkey...
16
Because another Libya is exactly what the world needs.
33
Ghanem’s plea sounds desperate, not hopeful. Setting aside five years of outside interference in Syria from disgruntled ex-pats, billions of dollars from Saudi Arabia and Qatar to maintain rebel armies, clandestine aid from the US and our NATO allies, the rebirth of al Qaeda, the birth of ISIS, the insertion of thousands of radicalized Muslims to battle Asad, and now a threatened Turkish invasion, we are to believe that the defeat of the Syrian government will be achieved by bribery.
Have we become so forgetful of Iraq 2003. From equating all the evil of the world in one man to claims of ties to 9/11 to images of nuclear attack and WMDs, we invaded a country that was to welcome us as liberators. Overthrowing a Sunni regime to put in a Shia government dissolved a country and produced chaos.
Now Americans are told that if only we acted with greater determination, beyond the non-lethal and lethal support we provide the rebels and our erstwhile Mideast allies, Asad will fall and all will be well.
As with all the Arab states, Syria is a dictatorship, but it was a secular state that had stability. Prior to the rebellion, cities were not bombed out ruins, medical treatment was widely available, food shortages were rare, students were in schools, a semblance of religious tolerance was the norm, and there were no tens of thousands of refugees or displaced persons.
Ghanem’s advocacy for the rebels will only perpetuate Syria’s suffering.
Have we become so forgetful of Iraq 2003. From equating all the evil of the world in one man to claims of ties to 9/11 to images of nuclear attack and WMDs, we invaded a country that was to welcome us as liberators. Overthrowing a Sunni regime to put in a Shia government dissolved a country and produced chaos.
Now Americans are told that if only we acted with greater determination, beyond the non-lethal and lethal support we provide the rebels and our erstwhile Mideast allies, Asad will fall and all will be well.
As with all the Arab states, Syria is a dictatorship, but it was a secular state that had stability. Prior to the rebellion, cities were not bombed out ruins, medical treatment was widely available, food shortages were rare, students were in schools, a semblance of religious tolerance was the norm, and there were no tens of thousands of refugees or displaced persons.
Ghanem’s advocacy for the rebels will only perpetuate Syria’s suffering.
17
Surely Iraqi and Afghan translators and other key employee who assisted our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan deserved assistance and the opportunity to build a new life in the US more than Assad's thugs. We actually helped so few of them that I cannot support your call for helping Assad's thugs.
8
Well said
DEFECTION Is a cheap and easy way to weaken and ultimately get rid of the monster, Assad. Ethnic minorities such as the Alawites and Druse have strong identification with their respective communities, so it would be a great bargain for the US and other allies to try to get them and other religious minorities to defect. There was an estimate that it cost $1 million to put each US soldier on the battlefield. For a mere fraction of that cost, minority soldiers who desperately want to fight against Assad would gladly leave for asylum for themselves and their families. US partners in Europe could provide places of asylum along with the US after proper vetting. Neutralizing Assad's secret service wouldn't be a bad idea either. I propose that the US initiate a new project, Boots Off The Ground, paying officers of religious minority and ethnic backgrounds to abandon Assad's army.
Interesting thought. Pay the Alawites to get rid of Assad and send them to Europe to get away from ISIS. Why don't we extend this strategy? Pay the Russians to dump Putin and send them to Canada where they will like the weather. Pay the Cubans to get rid of Castro and make them honorary Jews and send them to the West Bank to solve the demographic problem. the possibilities seem almost unlimited.
1
Is this the new normal -- to bribe government officials to defect and save bothersome UN resolutions, faux "saving civilians" and mounting messy coups d'etat?
Why not do the obvious and tell Saudi Arabia and the other Persian Gulf states to stop funding the terrorists instead of this childish and patently self-serving nonsense.
Why not do the obvious and tell Saudi Arabia and the other Persian Gulf states to stop funding the terrorists instead of this childish and patently self-serving nonsense.
66
"....Obama administration officials should say....that Mr. Assad cannot stay in power...Secretary of State John Kerry's recent conference with opposition leaders (=Syrian opposition) in Riyadh...left them wondering if the United States even wants Mr. Assad to leave". "America's current timeline, which gives Mr. Assad at least 13 months until his departure, wrongly signals to potential defectors that there is no hurry".
Mr. Ghanem should not be confused. Mr. Assad is considered by the Obama administration as the least of all evils in the Syrian quagmire. He is not their priority. In order to hasten Mr. Assad's downfall it is necessary to actually do something about him.
That being the case, it is doubtful that the US will take him up on his suggestion of buying military defectors. The Russians would probably just make a counter offer and in any case the the "is no hurry (US) policy" would probably just get the potential defectors killed by Mr. Assad. Hardly seems worth the risk for them.
Mr. Ghanem should not be confused. Mr. Assad is considered by the Obama administration as the least of all evils in the Syrian quagmire. He is not their priority. In order to hasten Mr. Assad's downfall it is necessary to actually do something about him.
That being the case, it is doubtful that the US will take him up on his suggestion of buying military defectors. The Russians would probably just make a counter offer and in any case the the "is no hurry (US) policy" would probably just get the potential defectors killed by Mr. Assad. Hardly seems worth the risk for them.
3
Deal with them like with the Nazis after germanys defeat,
don't deal with them like with the Ba'ath Party after iraqs defeat,
many of them are evil, but their inside knowledge can be the bedrock of a better society.
Besides, what alternatives are left if Daesh and Assad are removed or exterminated ?
The Nusra ? Which are just another Al-Qaeda with the hate for the west and israel.
If we have learned something from the recent decade in the middle east, than it's, it is better to have a police state than a islamic theocracy.
don't deal with them like with the Ba'ath Party after iraqs defeat,
many of them are evil, but their inside knowledge can be the bedrock of a better society.
Besides, what alternatives are left if Daesh and Assad are removed or exterminated ?
The Nusra ? Which are just another Al-Qaeda with the hate for the west and israel.
If we have learned something from the recent decade in the middle east, than it's, it is better to have a police state than a islamic theocracy.
2
what? you gave up your endless posts about greece, and now are involved with syria?
mathias, greece is lost without your german guiding light! come back...
mathias, greece is lost without your german guiding light! come back...
@reminore
refugees, middle east, ukraine or greece,
somehow it is always germany is left with the ungrateful role of handling something against all nationalistic, socialistic or populistic antics of other nations.
Don't tell us we have chosen this. Like with greece, the open door policies have been a desperate move by germany to gain some time to expand the scope of options - which of course didn't materialize.
With expecting millions of refugees we have an issue where we have a sound reason to meddle.
And the forecast, that nearly all arabs want to stay in germany, we got a problem, at the end of 2016 it could be 2 millions. And than we have to follow the example of sweden.
So expect germany pressing for a solution, this is for us more urgent than any other crisis.
This is not so different from greece. It is not the war we have to win, we must also have the people afterwards who can ensure an functional, maybe even restrictive government.
We got half a million syrians so far, mostly middle to upper class, and we have no problems to host some defected officers, too. This would be a good start for a post-war order.
refugees, middle east, ukraine or greece,
somehow it is always germany is left with the ungrateful role of handling something against all nationalistic, socialistic or populistic antics of other nations.
Don't tell us we have chosen this. Like with greece, the open door policies have been a desperate move by germany to gain some time to expand the scope of options - which of course didn't materialize.
With expecting millions of refugees we have an issue where we have a sound reason to meddle.
And the forecast, that nearly all arabs want to stay in germany, we got a problem, at the end of 2016 it could be 2 millions. And than we have to follow the example of sweden.
So expect germany pressing for a solution, this is for us more urgent than any other crisis.
This is not so different from greece. It is not the war we have to win, we must also have the people afterwards who can ensure an functional, maybe even restrictive government.
We got half a million syrians so far, mostly middle to upper class, and we have no problems to host some defected officers, too. This would be a good start for a post-war order.
This contradicts US policy goals. The US took a lesson from Iraq: when doing regime change, leave the state structures in place, and in particular leave the army in place.
The US wants Assad gone, but the Syrian Army intact to control the country. Given ISIS and al Qaeda fighting Assad, they imagine the Syrian Army continuing to fight them with Assad gone.
The US does not want to wreck the Syrian Army. It wants to take over and use the Syrian Army as part of regime change. It just wants a compliant Western-dependent dictator to run things the way the US tells him to run them, using Assad's intact Army.
So no, the US does not want to drain the Syrian Army of its fighting ability.
The US wants Assad gone, but the Syrian Army intact to control the country. Given ISIS and al Qaeda fighting Assad, they imagine the Syrian Army continuing to fight them with Assad gone.
The US does not want to wreck the Syrian Army. It wants to take over and use the Syrian Army as part of regime change. It just wants a compliant Western-dependent dictator to run things the way the US tells him to run them, using Assad's intact Army.
So no, the US does not want to drain the Syrian Army of its fighting ability.
39
The most recent US conflict - Libya, not Iraq - went down a different way; bomb it into regime change then walk completely away, not even looking in the rear view mirror. Voilà a successful "kinetic action", per Obama. We shouldn't be in Syria at all, but since Obama is as hell bent on taking Assad down as he is on capturing Snowden, he should admit that ISIS is certain to fill the power vacuum.
3
Agree but why would Assad leave? The Russians love dropping bombs. They get to show off their equipment for future sales in the region. They are a reliable supplier, not being concerned about what their weapons are used for, ISIS will soon be fighting for its life in Mosul so Assad will have one fewer potent enemy.
Precisely, look what happened when we disbanded the Iraqi army - they moved west and regrouped as ISIS. To further destabilize Syria certainly will not end the civil war, but spread it elsewhere.
1