OPINION_ Op-Ed: Just how committed is the U.S. to regime change in Syria?

DIGITAL JOURNAL

Op-Ed: Just how committed is the U.S. to regime change in Syria?

By Paul Iddon 2 hours ago in Politics

U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel has said that while present U.S. action in Syria has served to inadvertently benefit the Syrian regime they are still committed to seeing to its overthrow.

Photo:

When the United States intervened in Syria against the Islamic State (IS) group it was sure to give the Syrian authorities in Damascus a heads-up. Neither Syria's Air Force nor the remnants of its air defense attempted to target or shoot down any U.S. aircraft operating over the skies of northeastern Syria where they are continuing to bomb the Islamic State group. In fact the Syrian regime has intensified campaigns closer to home aimed at other opposition groups. Opposition groups which the United States has said it is backing.

This isn't a perfect state of affairs and Mr. Hagel readily admits as much. Assad for now is continuing to pound to rubble areas where Free Syrian Army (FSA) fighters are located, the very opposition fighters the administration, through the CIA, had been steadily supplying with small arms for some time in order to ensure they don't completely perish at the hands of the regime or IS – one rather embarrassing episode I'm sure you remember was that recent incident whereby Islamic State fighters were found to possess weaponry that was originally sent to the FSA.

U.S. General Martin Dempsey has said only some headway is being made regarding the administration's long term strategy for Syria: the vetting and training of a new moderate army in exile before inserting them back into the fray and giving them close support against IS. Support which will see to them fighting first and foremost IS in the northeast. Dempsey says the sites for such a training program have been selected and that the “command and control apparatus is in place.” Although for now the actual process of “recruiting and vetting” the foot soldiers for this new army has yet to begin.

So in other words more of the status quo for the foreseeable future, probably for at least another 18-months in fact. U.S.-led coalition air power will continue running sorties against IS in northeast Syria while the Syrian Air Force under orders from Assad's regime continue to target the remnants of that other moderate paramilitary the administration has said it supports.

Furthermore while this new opposition army they are preparing to train won't be friendly with Assad it will hardly be big enough or proficient enough in 18-months time to overthrow him too. It's not even certain if they can even retake towns IS control in northeastern Syria on their own which in turns raises question about whether or not the U.S. can realistically conduct its anti-IS campaign without any “boots on the ground” of its own.

With Turkey aboard however there are some things they could do. While many expressed fury with Turkey over the fact its army didn't intervene in in the Syrian Kurdish town of Kobani and protect a Kurdish affiliate of the PKK group (I never fully grasped the wisdom of sending uniformed Turkish troops along with tanks into an autonomous Kurdish enclave) against IS the Turkish government has reiterated its commitment to sending troops to Syria if necessary, provided they don't bare the burden and the cost alone. U.S. air power could effectively take the Syrian Air Force out of the equation, target important runways and Syrian Army installations and effectively defang Assad's ability to project significant conventional force against his enemies in places like Aleppo. The Turkish Army could then establish the buffer zone it has long sought to establish in the north.

That coupled with a continued campaign against IS in the northeast could constitute the open salvos of a long term strategy and endeavor in Syria that sees to the U.S. spearheading a regime change in Damascus. Something which it claims it is still seeking. I'm certainly not advocating they take this particular course of action, I'm just saying it would be the logical way to begin such a campaign if there is a military solution to alleviate the greater damage and ruin the status quo is pretty much guaranteed to bring about if left to persist.

One can see the dilemma Mr. Hagel finds himself in. He and his administration cannot really say they have their hands tied in regard to seeking a regime change in Syria. But there is little else they can do but continue to aim bombs at areas where they think their irregular IS enemies on the ground are while the rest of Syria continues to perish and the dictator remains entrenched in power.

This opinion article was written by an independent writer. The opinions and views expressed herein are those of the author and are not necessarily intended to reflect those of DigitalJournal.com

***

Chân thành cám ơn Quý Anh Chị ghé thăm "conbenho Nguyễn Hoài Trang Blog".
Xin được lắng nghe ý kiến chia sẻ của Quý Anh Chị trực tiếp tại Diễn Đàn Paltalk: 1Latdo Tapdoan Vietgian CSVN Phanquoc Bannuoc . 
Kính chúc Sức Khỏe Quý Anh Chị . 



conbenho
Tiểu Muội quantu
Nguyễn Hoài Trang
02112014
___________
Cộng sản Việt Nam là TỘI ÁC
Bao che, dung dưỡng TỘI ÁC là ĐỒNG LÕA với TỘI ÁC