18-Sep-13 World View-Russia pursues disastrous Syria policy

[John]

18-Sep-13 World View -- Russia and Vladimir Putin pursue a disastrous Syria policy


Syria's civil war versus Sri Lanka's civil war

** 18-Sep-13 World View -- Russia and Vladimir Putin pursue a disastrous Syria policy
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/ ... tm#e130918



Contents:
Time Magazine spares Americans the pro-Putin cover photo humiliation
Russia continues to torpedo the Syria 'deal'
Syria's civil war versus Sri Lanka's civil war


Keys:
Generational Dynamics, Russia, Vladimir Putin,
Time Magazine, Rick Stengel, Syria, Bashar al-Assad,
Burma, Myanmar, Ashin Wirathu,
France, Laurent Fabius, Sergei Lavrov,
Ban Ki-moon, Iran, Hezbollah, Sri Lanka

[Trevor]

Awakening era or era, I'm not sure I'm following your reasoning here. It might be an awakening era war, despite the enormous brutality associated with it, but sometimes an awakening era ends with the victory of the older generation. When that happens, it's usually with a massacre, and I don't see why he can't pull that off. It'll foreshadow a far worse war in a couple generations, of course, but I don't think Assad would care if it kept him in power.

As for Obama, I'm not sure he realizes or cares that he's being humiliated; being a Nomad, it takes a lot to get through his head. Even when trying to convince a skeptical public, he seemed desperate to try and find a way out of military action and Putin offered him the opportunity.

[John]

> Awakening era or era, I'm not sure I'm following your reasoning
> here. It might be an awakening era war, despite the enormous
> brutality associated with it, but sometimes an awakening era ends
> with the victory of the older generation. When that happens, it's
> usually with a massacre, and I don't see why he can't pull that
> off. It'll foreshadow a far worse war in a couple generations, of
> course, but I don't think Assad would care if it kept him in
> power.

> As for Obama, I'm not sure he realizes or cares that he's being
> humiliated; being a Nomad, it takes a lot to get through his
> head. Even when trying to convince a skeptical public, he seemed
> desperate to try and find a way out of military action and Putin
> offered him the opportunity.

I've actually written about this sort of thing a number of times. A
crisis civil war has a number of characteristics that make it
different from an external crisis war.

A crisis civil begins with protests and low-level violence during the
generational Awakening era. The violence continues and grows for
decades, with periods of violence alternating with periods of "peace
agreements" that fall apart. Eventually, the regeneracy occurs and
there's a full-scale civil war, ending in a crisis climax. That ends
the violence and the protests through the Recovery era, until there's
a new Awakening era, and the cycle starts again.

Assad's father ended his civil war with a massive slaughter of tens of
thousands of people in Hama in 1982, and he's trying to repeat that
victory today, by the mass slaughter of every Sunni possible by any
means possible.

But the problem for al-Assad is that the opposition also remembers
what happened in 1982, and they're not going to "fall for that" again.
From their point of view, they're not going to just collapse, the way
their parents did in 1982. They're going to try to prevent a similar
massacre if they can, but even if they can't, "this time it's
different", and they're going to continuing fighting until they get
retribution.

And that doesn't even mention the Sunni jihadists coming from around
the region. They couldn't care less how many Syrian women and
children are slaughtered. They're on a jihad, and nothing will stop
them until they're dead.

Even if al-Assad achieves some significant victory that causes the
fighting to stop (and I don't see how that's possible), it's still not
going to stop the peaceful protests that were original motivations for
al-Assad's murderous mass slaughter. Such protests are characteristic
of a generational Awakening era, with or without a civil war.

You say that Awakening era wars usually end with a massacre, and I'm
not sure what you mean, since generational conflicts in an Awakening
era usually end with a political climax rather than with a massacre.

Perhaps you're referring to China. China is an interesting case,
since the Tiananmen Square massacre appears to have ended the
protests. I would have to say that China's security forces have been
remarkably effective since then of crushing protests, but the massacre
did launch the Falun Gong movement.

However, I believe that China differs from Syria in several ways.
First, China's population (in the east) is pretty homogeneously all
Han Chinese, governed by a Han Chinese government, while Syria's
governing Alawites is only a small minority of the population.
Second, Syria is a small country in a region with open borders, which
is not true of China. Perhaps al-Assad would like to do what China
did, but with a minority population, open borders, and Sunni jihadists
coming in, I don't see how al-Assad can succeed. So I don't see
anything like the regime's 1982 victory being repeated. He may get a
temporary "peace agreement," but it certainly won't stop the peaceful
protests that triggered al-Assad's violence in the first place.

[at99sy]

John
I agree that Assad is near certain to lose power in the not too distant future. I see no actions that would lead to his permanent rule any longer. Aside from Russia sending in "advisers" and shoring up his government with arms, his days are getting shorter.

My concerns are not about the "war" but about the after effects of whatever conclusion comes of it. Either the "rebels" will take over and they will have their
victory and continue to spread war from the brand new Caliphate, or Russia will install a new regime to attempt to create some semblance of stability. Russia does not want this escalating beyond Syria and they must remember getting their asses handed to them in Afghanistan. We never learn those lessons. The US certainly meddled with assassinations and regime change in the Americas and beyond for a few decades. Installing one dictator after another.

In essence, I think that what happens after the "civil war" is over will be more important that the war itself in respect to interests outside of Syria. This situation could dictate policy and actions for decades if we have any functioning governments at that time at least.

sy