There are many behind-the-scenes political activities pointing to a diplomatic solution for Syria.
Unless Baschar al-Assad whose sarin gas canisters and chlorine gas barrel bombs have killed thousands of innocent civilians is indicted for war crimes against humanity and put on trial, any diplomatic solution would be hard to force upon the Syrian people to comply with.
Do not make the same mistake the Obama administration made when it decided to orchestrate the Syrian civil war to fit its own objectives. It will come back to haunt us even more with ISIS taking advantage of those mistakes to remain a strong player.
Russian objectives do not mirror those of the Syrian people the same way ISIS objectives do not mirror those of Saudi Arabia, nor do Iranian objectives mirror those of rebels fighting in the war. Any diplomatic solution must satisfy the Syrian people first or it will fail miserably. Ask General Petraeus about Iraq.
Here are some diplomatic solutions that would be rejected by the Syrian people and those on the ground fighting:
- A diplomatic solution that would exonerate Assad from his crimes against humanity by sticking his brother Maher, or some other “fall guy”, with the crimes. There is a Russio-American effort underway at the U.N. to “find” those who have committed those crimes. This sounds too cozy and too convenient. Russia would never agree to accusing Assad publicly of his crimes.
- A diplomatic solution where Assad accepts to be relieved from his duties in return for sanctuary in Iran or Russia after being exonerated from all the crimes he committed. An Assad delegation dispatched to Oman this last week is indicative of Assad positioning his exit for maximum concessions provided courtesy of John Kerry. Such would not sit well with the Arab street nor with those fighting in the war even if Saudi Arabia agrees, in principle, to forcing Assad out without his due punishment (Darfur comes to mind). The ISIS model of self-funding is as viable to the rest of the rebels, and they will keep fighting with or without Saudi Arabia if Assad is not indicted and put on trial.
- A diplomatic solution for a new parliament that would replace the old parliament to vote for and retain Assad until his illegal term expires in 2021. The worst possible scenarios ever. We hope John Kerry is not the fool to fall in this Russian trap.
- Any diplomatic solution to keep Assad in play while it attempts to fund the Syrian rebels to turn on ISIS will fail miserably. Obama just tried this military solution and he was able to recruit only 54 fighters using top dollar payment system.
- Any diplomatic solution to split Syria officially along sectarian lines will only delay the inevitable: A slow burning civil war that will last decades where raids, kidnappings, suicide attacks, and the occasional fighter jet strikes will replace the heavy artillery. Terror will continue unabated.
- Any diplomatic solution that would highlight ISIS danger and the need to eliminate the terror organization, but diminishes the Assad damage to the country. If we want ISIS to grow, do exactly the opposite of what the Syrian people want. If you want ISIS to die, give the Syrian people what they want and they will kill ISIS for us. Have we not learned from Iraq this hard lesson when it comes to al-Qaeda?
- Any diplomatic solution that does not take into account the welfare of the Syrian people will fail. Mark our words. As much as we would like friendly nations to play a positive role in these negotiations, it is not up to Saudi Arabia, Iran, Russia, or the United States to decide what happens to millions of Syrians. John Kerry and Barack Obama are the perfect couple to make this mistake because of their narcissistic inclinations.
Syria is a complex cauldron of burning ashes and glowing cinders. Touch it the wrong way and you may burn your hands. Meet the reasonable demands of its people while insisting on fighting terror and you may enjoy peace for a long time.
Here at TFS, we have tried, for over a year, to contact Ben Rhodes to advice him on Syria. He refused our advice. Now he must live with the consequences. We hope the U.S. State Department is smarter than he is.