A friend asked today what I thought of the current situation in Syria. I responded:
Predictable and predicted. The Syria commitment was not sustainable. The US needs to reduce its commitments to the Middle East to a level that serves vital interests and is sustainable. It should do that carefully, using diplomacy to ensure no vacuums are left. That can’t happen with this President.
I guess that puts me at least partly in Elizabeth Warren’s camp and opposed to Josh Rogin, who is a fine journalist but far more of an enthusiast for US engagement in the Middle East than I am.
Let me recount the reasons:
The American drawdown from the Middle East should not be precipitous. It should be cautious and leave no power vacuums. That is what diplomacy is for: we need to be working on regional security arrangements that can guarantee that no one’s interests will be ignored and reasonable compromises will prevail. That effort will require serious attention to threat perceptions, regional trade and infrastructure, people-to-people relations, and traditional conflict management mechanisms in the region. Yes, more diplomacy, less force, and a lot of hard work and commonsense.
Al Sharaa won't be able to decide, but his decisions will influence the outcome. Let's…
Transparently assembling all the material and technology needed for nuclear weapons might serve Iran well…
The fall of the Assad regime in Syria was swift. Now comes the hard part:…
Good luck and timing are important factors in diplomacy. It's possible Grenell will not fail…
There are big opportunities in Syria to make a better life for Syrians. Not to…
HTS-led forces have done a remarkable job in a short time. The risks of fragmentation…