Giving the GOP more reason to complain about a failed White House foreign policy, 70-year-old Secretary of State John Kerry insisted that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad must go, leaving the timetable open. With Russian President Vladimir Putin responding to al-Assad’s request for military help, Kerry warned Moscow about providing military assistance to its old ally. Washington and Moscow agree on one thing: Something must be done to end the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria AKA ISIS, ISIL or, more recently, IS. Insisting on al-Assad’s ouster puts U.S. foreign policy in direct conflict with Russia. Speaking with British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond, Kerry reiterated the White House’s untenable position: That al-Assad must go. Kerry thinks that if al-Assad goes, the U.N. Security Council would find a suitable alternative to replace al-Assad’s regime.
Since the Syrian civil war started March 11, 2011, the Syrian Observatory of Human rights counts over 300,000 deaths, millions more fleeing for their lives to Europe and beyond. “We need to get to the negotiation. That is what we’re looking for and we hope Russia and Iran, and any other countries with influence, will help bring about that, because that’s what is preventing the crisis from ending,” said Kerry, urging Russia to back the U.S. plan. Supplying more troops, military equipment and aircraft to al-Assad, Moscow shows no intent of abandoning its longstanding ally. Kerry’s dreaming, kidding himself, that Moscow’s going pressure al-Assad to give up his U.N.-recognized sovereign state. President Barack Obama shows no signs of learning anything from the Iraq War, especially what happens when you topple a dictator and open up the floodgates of Islamic terrorism.
Getting the U.K’s foreign secretary to agree with the U.S. position in no way makes the White House policy viable. There’s no basis to believe that Putin is anything but loyal of al-Assad due to Russia’s longstanding Tartus Mediterranean naval base. Putin doesn’t want to see al-Assad go because of what happened in Iraq. Replacing al-Assad’s Alawite Shiite regime wouldn’t be easy, with multiple Sunni terrorist groups, including ISIS and al-Qaeda, vying for control. Kerry and Hammond offer nothing new other than more lip service about getting rid of al-Assad. As long as Russia and Iran support al-Assad, he won’t be going anywhere. “We’re prepared to negotiate. Is Assad prepared to negotiate, really negotiate/?” Is Russia prepared to bring him to the table?” asked Kerry, not dealing with reality. Al-Assad, or Moscow for that matter, has shown no sign of getting out.
Obama and Kerry’s assumption that Putin would betray al-Assad not only lacks reality, it defies all common sense. What possible reason would Putin jeopardize his Tartus naval base, a strategic part of Russia’s warm water fleet. “For the last year and a half, we have said Assad has to go, but how long and what the modality is . . that’s a decision that has to be made in the context of the Geneva process and negotiation,” said Kerry, making zero sense. White House Syrian policy is so off-the-wall unilaterally negotiating regime change in Damascus. Only the U.S. and its closest allies fantasize about al-Assad ceding power. For Kerry to talk out-of-his-hat like the White House can determine Syria’s sovereignty hurts U.S. foreign policy. Instead of staking unrealistic positions, the White House should listen to Russian proposals designed to battle ISIS end the Syrian civil war
U.S. and European Union officials talk about the Syrian immigration crisis threatening Europe’s territorial integrity and stagnant economy. Stopping the Syrian civil war and ending ISIS reign to terror in Iraq and Syria should be the White House’s top priority. Whatever eventually happens to al-Assad, the White House is in not position to call the shots. Unless Obama is ready for a mass mobilization on U.S. troops, he’s in not position to comment about an official regime change policy. Russia and Iran have no intention of abandoning al-Assad, nor will they follow any U.S. prescription. If the White House and EU really want to end the Syrian crisis, they need to get on the same page with Moscow and Tehran about defeating ISIS. “I just know that the people of Syria have already spoken with their feet. They’re leaving Syria,” said Kerry, ignoring any real solution other than al-Assad must go.
Ending the Syrian civil war—not regime change in Damascus—should be the current U.S. and EU objective in the region. Getting on the same page as Moscow and Tehran would go along way to improve U.S. international relations. White House regime change policy does nothing other than add to the problem. Obama and Kerry know that al-Assad’s regime is the legitimate U.N.-recognized sovereign state, not ISIS, al-Qaeda or a host of Saudi-backed terror groups seeking to topple al-Assad. Instead spewing rhetoric that backs ISIS and al-Qaeda’s goal of toppling al-Assad, the U.S. should coordinate with Moscow and Tehran to destroy ISIS and end the Syrian civil war, leaving the al-Assad question to another day. Putin and his foreign minister Sergei Lavrov would like nothing more for the U.S. to come around to a sensible position. It’s current Syrian policy adds to the problem and makes no sense.
