Skip to main content

A ridiculous attempt to sum up Syria or PICK A SIDE ALREADY

I wouldn't lose any sleep if Assad ended up hanging from a street light. But that's not my decision, or yours, unless you are Syrian. Although these things are hard to measure during a war, it appears people in Syria aren't really looking for that. Most people live under government control and have taken it to be the least worst option. That's hardly an endorsement for life under Assad, but it is a recognition that people believe the opposition, at this point pretty well exclusively jihadists, would be worse. It's not difficult to see why, as these same people are setting up slave markets in Libya, a country that quickly went to hell after they lost their despot because of an American regime change project. This is hard for us soft first worlders to comprehend, as we've never had to make such an unclean choice. It doesn't sit well and our moralism demands we pick a side.

We usually only hear about the regime and the opposition. But if we must choose a side, you'd have to sympathize with the Syrian Democratic Forces, a coalition of Kurdish leftists and Sunni Arabs who control a part of northern Syria, if you had any shred of humanity. That's not meant to be an exaggeration. These people, and it's important not to say "guys" here because they have a impressive contingent of Kurdish female fighters, are the only force that hasn't committed a massacre. They are the only force that isn't completely authoritarian or rabidly sectarian and reactionary. They also are good fighters, both the Americans and Russians consider them impressive. This is all fairly amazing given the context, and makes them a pretty easy choice.

The SDF is not a unifying force, however. They don't claim to be, and likely have no desire to be. The introduction of Sunni Arabs was a marriage of convenience and it's surprising it has lasted this long. They have a sort of strategic indifference to Assad's army right now, although they have battled in the past. They are absolute enemies to both Islamic State and Turkey, and (somewhat) allied to both Russia and the United States, which is quite impressive (and says a lot about how disgusting The Turkish regime is).

If the United States decides to oust Assad, the most organized groups within the opposition will take power in Damascus. This means the jihadists. This also means another civil war, certainly between the jihadists and the Kurds, but also between rival factions within the jihadists (e.g., Libya, Afghanistan). This also could very well bring Turkey back into Syria, as they are not one to miss an opportunity to attack weakened Kurds on their border. If the United States doesn't pursue regime change, and Assad is able to solidify power, there is a greater chance of some sort of agreement for Kurdish autonomy in the north. While this is no certain road to peace, Turkey would surely consider this a disaster and fighting could break out between different Kurdish groups and/or between Assad and the Kurds, it's also the best worst option.

Many in Syria understand this, which is why they aren't nearly as caught up in arguments over Assad's character as silly American pundits and much of the human rights industry. It's tough for us not to play hero, but history shows dead bodies pile up the fastest when we start thinking all these complex and murky choices are always ours to make.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I’m somewhat familiar with the story, but haven’t seen the tv series “the plot against America.” Is it any good? I’ll admit I have doubts that will be difficult to overcome. My guess is it’s a well stylized but historically simplified attempt to frame international liberalism, particularly the US dominated post war order, as something deeper than what it has become- a value championed almost exclusively by the cosmopolitan elite and global corporations. I also predict that the entire post WW1 context (three months involvement and almost 120,000 Americans dead, split evenly between fighting and the flu pandemic) is lost to Lindbergh and his anti-Semitism. Is this accurate? “The man in the high castle,” another alternative history book made into a tv series that I actually did watch, missed an opportunity to dig into American militarism by not really explaining why so many high level American military members joined the Nazis. (We were supposed to believe it’s just because the Germans wo
  I voted for Joe Biden and hope he wins. I’m also alarmed at the increasingly transparent alliance between the Democratic Party and influential sectors of corporate America, namely media conglomerates and the technology industry. (Their relationship reminds me of the Republican Party and the energy industry.) It’s true there are conservative media outlets that are not friendly to Democrats, but it’s far less certain how objective the “paper of record” and other “serious” media would be to a post-Trump and post-COVID Biden administration that is politically and ascetically their peer. (I would say we are at a point of competing Pravdas, but that would be a slander against the Soviet newspaper’s pre-Stalinist period when it was a battleground of ideas.) Perhaps even more damning is the Democratic Party’s relationship to the technology industry, particularly when companies like Twitter and Facebook have shown they are prepared to unilaterally decide what’s true and what’s false. Not many
State power (that is the ability of the state to use brute force) has increased beyond any somewhat comparable moment in history, yet the state’s ability to everyday govern has decreased to historically poor levels. People (across the political spectrum) typically make sense of this through various conspiracy theories, some more attached to reality than others. (Many are nakedly conspiratorial, others have elements of structural analyses, usually done by trained post-structuralists of course.) America is ground zero, but this is not exclusively an American phenomenon. (China is a possible counter-example, though their competence is both exaggerated and relies heavily on the brute force part of the state.)  This creates a stalemate of sorts. The state lacks legitimacy, but also can’t be replaced. You can add Ross Douthat’s Laschian critique of societal “decadence” (drift may be a better word) to this context. His analysis is largely correct in my view and he’s also right that it’s relat