Putin: Friend or Foe in Syria?
By Patrick J. Buchanan
September 18, 2015 "Information
Clearing House" -
What Vladimir Putin is up to in Syria makes far more sense than what
Barack Obama and John Kerry appear to be up to in Syria.
The Russians are flying transports bringing tanks and
troops to an air base near the coastal city of Latakia to create a
supply chain to provide a steady flow of weapons and munitions to
the Syrian army.
Syrian President Bashar Assad, an ally of Russia,
has lost half his country to ISIS and the Nusra Front, a branch of
al-Qaida.
Putin fears that if Assad falls, Russia's toehold
in Syria and the Mediterranean will be lost, ISIS and al-Qaida will
be in Damascus, and Islamic terrorism will have achieved its
greatest victory.
Is he wrong?
Winston Churchill famously said in 1939: "I cannot
forecast to you the action of Russia. It is a riddle wrapped in a
mystery inside an enigma; but perhaps there is a key. That key is
Russian national interest."
Exactly. Putin is looking out for Russian national
interests.
And who do we Americans think will wind up in
Damascus if Assad falls? A collapse of that regime, not out of the
question, would result in a terrorist takeover, the massacre of
thousands of Alawite Shiites and Syrian Christians, and the flight
of millions more refugees into Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey — and
thence on to Europe.
Putin wants to prevent that. Don't we?
Why then are we spurning his offer to work with
us?
Are we still so miffed that when we helped to dump
over the pro-Russian regime in Kiev, Putin countered by annexing
Crimea?
Get over it.
Understandably, there is going to be friction
between the two greatest military powers. Yet both of us have a
vital interest in avoiding war with each other and a critical
interest in seeing ISIS degraded and defeated.
And if we consult those interests rather than
respond to a reflexive Russophobia that passes for thought in the
think tanks, we should be able to see our way clear to collaborate
in Syria.
Indeed, the problem in Syria is not so much with
the Russians — or Iran, Hezbollah and Assad, all of whom see the
Syrian civil war correctly as a fight to the finish against Sunni
jihadis.
Our problem has been that we have let our friends
— the Turks, Israelis, Saudis and Gulf Arabs — convince us that no
victory over ISIS can be achieved unless and until we bring down
Assad.
Once we get rid of Assad, they tell us, a grand
U.S.-led coalition of Arabs and Turks can form up and march in to
dispatch ISIS.
This is neocon nonsense.
Those giving us this advice are the same "cakewalk
war" crowd who told us how Iraq would become a democratic model for
the Middle East once Saddam Hussein was overthrown and how Moammar
Gadhafi's demise would mean the rise of a pro-Western Libya.
When have these people ever been right?
What is the brutal reality in this Syrian civil
war, which has cost 250,000 lives and made refugees of half the
population, with 4 million having fled the country?
After four years of sectarian and ethnic
slaughter, Syria will most likely never again be reconstituted along
the century-old map lines of Sykes-Picot.
Partition appears inevitable.
And though Assad may survive for a time, his
family's days of ruling Syria are coming to a close.
Yet it is in America's interest not to have Assad
fall — if his fall means the demoralization and collapse of his
army, leaving no strong military force standing between ISIS and
Damascus.
Indeed, if Assad falls now, the beneficiary is not
going to be those pro-American rebels who have defected or been
routed every time they have seen combat and who are now virtually
extinct.
The victors will be ISIS and the Nusra Front,
which control most of Syria between the Kurds in the northeast and
the Assad regime in the southwest.
Syria could swiftly become a strategic base camp
and sanctuary of the Islamic State from which to pursue the battle
for Baghdad, plot strikes against America and launch terror attacks
across the region and around the world.
Prediction: If Assad falls and ISIS rises in
Damascus, a clamor will come — and not only from the Lindsey Grahams
and John McCains — to send a U.S. army to invade and drive ISIS out,
while the neocons go scrounging around to find a Syrian Ahmed
Chalabi in northern Virginia.
Then this nation will be convulsed in a great war
debate over whether to send that U.S. army to invade Syria and
destroy ISIS.
And while our Middle Eastern and European allies
sit on the sidelines and cheer on the American intervention, this
country will face an anti-war movement the likes of which have not
been seen since Col. Lindbergh spoke for America First.
In making ISIS, not Assad, public enemy No. 1,
Putin has it right.
It is we Americans who are the mystery inside an
enigma now.
Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of the new
book "The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to
Create the New Majority." To find out more about Patrick Buchanan
and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit
the Creators Web page at www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2015 CREATORS.COM