There are few people with some level of sanity in their heads in the USA...
On Syria: Thank you, Russia!
Once again, Moscow has shown itself
better able to make strategic choices than we are. Russia is not an
ideal partner for the United States, but sometimes its interests align
with ours. In those cases, we should drop our Cold War hostility and
work with Russia. The best place to start is Syria.
American policy toward Syria was
misbegotten from the start of the current conflict five years ago. By
immediately adopting the hardest possible line—“Assad must go”—we
removed any incentive for opposition groups to negotiate for peaceful
change. That helped propel Syria into its bloody nightmare.
Russia, which has suffered repeated
terror attacks from Islamic fanatics, is threatened by the chaos and
ungoverned space that now defines Syria. So are we. Russia’s policy
should be ours: prevent the fall of Bashar al-Assad’s government, craft a
new regime that would include Assad or his supporters, and then work
for a cease-fire.
The fall of Assad would create a
catastrophic power vacuum like those that have turned Iraq and Libya
into terrorist havens. This would be bad for the United States, and even
worse for Russia and Iran. We should recognize this common interest,
and work with countries that want what we want.
This may seem eminently logical, but the
very suggestion is hateful in Washington. It violates a central precept
of the liberal/conservative, Republican-Democrat foreign policy
consensus: Russia is our eternal enemy, so anything that promotes
Russia’s interests automatically undermines ours — and that goes double
for Iran. Instead of clinging to this dangerously outdated
with-us-or-against-us mantra, we should realize that countries with
which we differ in some areas can be our partner in others. Russia is an
ideal example.
We would have been more secure as a
nation, and might have contributed to a more stable world, if we had
followed Russia’s foreign policy lead in the past. The government Moscow
supported in Afghanistan, run by Mohammad Najibullah from 1987-92, was
more honest and progressive than any that has ruled Afghanistan since
American-backed forces deposed Najibullah. Later, Russia urged the
United States not to invade Iraq and overthrow Saddam Hussein. They were
right both times, and we were wrong. In Syria, Russia is right for a
third time. Keeping the odious Assad in power, at least for the moment,
best serves American interests. The alternative could be an ISIS
“caliphate” stretching from the Mediterranean to the Tigris River.
No military solution is possible in
Syria. Continued fighting only adds to the toll of death and horror.
Russia wants a negotiated settlement. We are reluctant, because our
so-called friends in the region want to keep fighting. They calculate
continuing war to be in their interest. It may be — but it is not in the
interest of the United States.
Opposition groups in Syria that we have
half-heartedly supported refuse to negotiate until a cease-fire is in
place. By accepting that formula, the United States guarantees continued
war. Instead, negotiations should be aimed at creating a new regime
that both Russia and the United States could support. From there, peace
can grow.
How long Assad remains in power is not
crucial to the United States. Weakening ISIS and al Qaeda is. Fighting
those forces is the policy of Russia and Iran. We should recognize this
confluence of interests, and work with every country or faction that
shares our goals in Syria.
Our reflexive rejection of all
cooperation with Russia is a throwback to a vanished era. It prevents us
from taking decisive steps to ease the crisis in Syria. Its effects are
also being felt in Europe. The Obama administration recently announced a
four-fold increase in spending for troop deployments near Russia.
Russia responded with military maneuvers near its border with Ukraine.
This spiral of tension ignores the reality that Europe can never be
truly secure without Russian cooperation.
Refusing to work with Russia hurts us
more than it hurts Russia. Seeking avenues of cooperation would benefit
both, and contribute to global security. Syria is the best place to
start. Russia’s strategy — fight ISIS and al Qaeda, defend Assad, and
seek a cease-fire that preserves his regime in some form — is the least
bad option. Until we accept it, Syrian blood will continue to flow.
Stephen Kinzer is a senior fellow at the Watson Institute for International Studies at Brown University. Follow him on Twitter @stephenkinzer.
The original source of this article is The Boston Globe (Opinion)
Copyright © Stephen Kinzer, The Boston Globe (Opinion), 2016
No comments:
Post a Comment