Syria Mess and I am Sid Harth@webworldismyoyster.com
Separately gathered news about Syria is as follows:
In Russia, Even Putin’s Critics Are OK With His Syria Policy
July 23, 2012 | 7:20 pm
On Monday afternoon, Italian premier Mario Monti and Russian president Vladimir Putin convened a small press conference in the slanting, gold light coming off the Black Sea. They had just met to discuss the European economic crisis as well as energy (Italy is Russia’s second biggest gas client), but they also touched on the deepening conflict in Syria.
“We do not want the situation to develop along the lines of a bloody civil war and for it to continue for who knows how many years, like in Afghanistan,” Putin said, standing with his perfect posture in a slate-gray summer suit. “We want there to be peace.” Russia does not want to see the establishment and the opposition to simply switch sides and keep fighting, Putin went on. Russia’s position remains unchanged, commented the reporter of Channel One, the country’s biggest (and state controlled) television channel. “The only way out of the crisis is through negotiations.”
The insistent, demonstrative reasonableness of Putin’s quote was more than bluster; it was also a reflection of how most Russians, including the Russian press, understand their country’s role in Syria’s ongoing civil war.
If the West has come to see Russia as the ornery spoiler in Syria, as the last ally of the cruel and increasingly embattled regime of Bashar al-Assad, Russia sees itself as the last sane person left in the room, the one geopolitical actor able to put emotion and cliché aside in favor of rational, balanced thought. Glancing at Russian press coverage of the Syrian conflict—and it is, in the Russian perspective a “crisis”—one will notice that it does not get nearly the same kind of coverage here as it does in the Western press. “Why does this peripheral country get so much attention?” Fyodor Lukyanov, editor of Russia in World Affairs exclaimed when we spoke. “It just is not considered something extremely significant here.”
The Western observer tends to split the Russian press into two camps: evil statists and martyrs. But for their part, members of the Russian press are convinced of their superiority over their Western colleagues, at least when it comes to Syria. Russian journalists aren’t under the illusion that they are more objective than their Western counterparts, but they are convinced of their ability to convey a more realistic, complex picture of the events in Syria.
“The essence of the conflict is portrayed differently here than in the West,” explains Lukyanov. “Here, it is not a picture of peace-loving freedom fighters against a secretive, repressive regime. The Western picture is highly ideological and primitive. They have a template that’s used for all countries, even though, when it comes to these revolutions in the Arab world, each country is more complex than the previous one. The situation in Syria is much more tangled.” And though you can find a great variety of views on Syria in Russia—anything from the conspirological view that America is arming the rebels and ginned up the uprising to begin with, to the pro-Western, liberal chagrin that Russia is once again backing the bad guys—you would be hard-pressed to find a news outlet that uses the term “Arab Spring.”
Russian point of view starts with the naiveté of the Western point of view, and its corollary: That Russians alone can glimpse the ugly truths that run the world. “The Russian press is more accurate than the Western press, because the West, in painting [the Free Syrian Army] as freedom fighters, doesn’t understand that these guys, are blood-sucking vampires and if they come to power there will be hell to pay, and for the Americans, too,” says Maxim Yusin, the deputy editor of the foreign affairs section of the daily newspaper Kommersant, Russia’s largest and among its more liberal. (I should note that, in my three years reporting on Russia and befriending local colleagues, I’ve only ever previously heard the opposite: a refrain about the superiority of American journalism to the unprofessionalism of the still young Russian press.)
clipped one paragraph here…
clipped another paragraph here…
A poll done this spring by the independent Levada Center found that the vast majority of Russians do not support more sanctions against Assad, and even fewer support armed intervention. Asked how they would describe the situation in Syria, most said they saw it either as a civil war or as “terrorists, abetted by the West” fighting a “legitimate government.” But the biggest share of all just didn’t know how to answer.
…and I am Sid Harth@webworldismyoyster.com
3 days ago – Jul 10, 2012 – Syria, Seriously: Arsenic or Arms? « वसुधैव कुटुंबकम. www.webworldismyoyster.com/2012/…/syria-seriously-arsenic-or-ar …
Jul 15, 2012 – www.webworldismyoyster.com/…/syria-seriously-us-media-led-… 10 minutes ago – I have written about highly inaccurate but heavily promoted …
11 hours ago – www.webworldismyoyster.com/…/syria-seriously-us-media-le… Jul 15, 2012 – इदं न मम – Loveless US China Relations and I – My Sister …
1 day ago – Milestone 348 · Fight For Aleppo Has Begun, Say Syrian Rebels 321 …. It must have been a few election cycles since his last trip: The grocery …
5 days ago – www.webworldismyoyster.com/…/syria-palace-coup-inside-job-i-thin… 7 minutes ago – Syria Palace Coup, Inside Job, I Think… 3 hours ago …
6 days ago – From difficulties of not obtaining, authentic, verifiable news from Syria‘s pitched battlegrounds to lack of high level contacts, American foreign …
4 days ago – Jun 21, 2012 – Tensions between UK and Russia soared over Syria-bound helicopters … cameron will probably be ditched in the next election …
Jun 30, 2012 – Thanks Pew Research Center. …and I am Sid Harth@webworldismyoyster.com …. हिन्दू तर्क शास्त्रद्न्य सिद्धार्थ – Syria, …
I ask politely. …and I am Sid Harth@webworldismyoyster.com · FP: The Long and … Mitt-Man is a dead man walking · Syria Palace Coup, Inside Job, I Think …
Jul 15, 2012 – Syria, Seriously, US media led Propaganda@mysistereileen.com … …and I am (Not Mitt Romney) Harth@webworldismyoyster.com · Dr Barack …You +1′d this
By David Lesch, Special to CNN
Editor’s note: David W. Lesch is professor of Middle East History at Trinity University in San Antonio, Texas, and author or editor of 12 books, including the upcoming “Syria: The Fall of the House of Assad.” The views expressed are solely those of the author.
The past couple of weeks haven’t been good to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. First, his long-time friend and presumed regime insider, General Manaf Tlas, defected. This was followed soon after by the defection of the Syrian ambassador to Iraq. In the past week it has been reported that a number of high-ranking Syrian military officers defected to the Syrian opposition, perhaps taking their cue from Tlas. Finally, on July 18, a massive bomb exploded in a national security compound in Damascus, killing an unspecified number of Syrian security personnel, including the defense minister and the deputy defense minister, the latter being Assaf Shawkat, Assad’s brother-in-law.
These were certainly serious body blows to the regime. Taken in and of themselves they aren’t necessarily fatal blows to the regime, especially since Tlas’ and reportedly even Shawkat’s access to the inner sanctums of the decision making apparatus weren’t what they once were. Nonetheless, oftentimes perception is more important than reality. And the perception is that two long-time stalwarts of the regime, one (Tlas) from a family that more than any other has been associated over the decades with propping up the Assads, both father and son, and the other (Shawkat) a relative to al-Assad by marriage who had been the head of military intelligence in Syria and for years the most feared person in the country, are now gone. Because of this, it appears that the regime might be on the verge of imploding. The fact that the bomb apparently was planted inside a high security complex that played host to a national security meeting had to send shockwaves throughout the regime. How can anyone feel safe at this point? Are there moles in the inner sanctums of the regime that planted the bomb? In other words, a regime that was already paranoid about pernicious unseen forces arrayed against it just became that much more unsure of who its friends and enemies are.
There’s also the perception that the opposition armed forces are getting better at striking at the heart of the regime. It’s clear that their shift in tactics from trying to take and hold parts of cities, which failed miserably against superior government forces – so dramatically revealed in Homs earlier in the year – toward adopting guerrilla warfare has been much more effective at wearing down government forces and striking devastating psychological blows at the regime. The tactical support, arms, funding, and training opposition forces are receiving directly and indirectly from an array of anti-Assad countries appear to have finally paid some dividends.
Al-Assad could claim for a long time during the uprising that the violence was relegated to the rural areas and select cities; the two largest cities, Aleppo and Damascus, were relatively safe and secure. This is no longer the case. As a result, many of those Syrian fence-sitters, who supported the regime not because of any predilection for al-Assad but for the lack of any viable alternative, may now think twice about whether or not to stick it out with the regime. With the perception that there is no place to go, that the regime is on the defensive and that the opposition is making important military inroads, high-level Syrian officials may think hard about defecting, following the path set out by Tlas and others. If this is the case, as often happens, what follows is a cascade of defections that undermines the foundation of a regime.
The question now is how the Syrian regime will react to the bombing. Will al-Assad see the end of the tunnel for his regime and more vigorously pursue a diplomatic resolution that leads to a transition of power, although he would do so from a perceived position of weakness? Or will he – and his military-security advisors – lash out in a violent fashion to show that he’s still powerful, in control, and capable of withstanding the heat? If recent history is a guide, he will unfortunately choose the latter option. If this is the case, the regime’s attempts thus far at calibrated bloodletting, i.e. enough of a crackdown to suppress the rebellion but not enough to galvanize the international community into action, may be difficult. Certainly there will be those in the regime, maybe even loyalists of Shawkat in the security services, who figure the gloves are off. They may find evidence as to who carried out the assassinations, where their home villages are, and then take to wiping them out. Vengeance in the Middle East is often gruesome and convulsive. In an election year, the United States will most likely continue to wade along the sidelines regardless; besides, it likes what it sees in terms of the perceived weakening of a regime that may be on its last legs, so why change course.
Welcome to the next ugly phase of the Syrian uprising, where violence becomes more indiscriminate than it already has been. Both sides believe it is an existential conflict. And if this is the tipping point for the al-Assad regime, what will it do to desperately hang on? Then there’s still a whole other set of questions regarding what will follow after al-Assad falls – and he will fall. The serious fault lines that divide the opposition might ultimately make the post-Assad environment equally rich in blood, at least until one party wins and imposes its vision for Syria’s future. One can only hope that the last reeds of a relatively peaceful transition are grasped through diplomacy, compelling the Russians – Vladimir Putin – to realize that they’ve wedded themselves to a sinking ship and have one last opportunity to leverage their influence toward a resolution of the problem with rather than against the international community. Perhaps a fanciful wish at this point, but the alternative is more of what we have just witnessed.
From around the web
soundoff (272 Responses)
The Global Public Square is where you can make sense of the world every day with insights and explanations from CNN’s Fareed Zakaria, leading journalists at TIME and CNN, and other international thinkers. Join GPS editor Jason Miks and get informed about global issues, exposed to unique stories, and engaged with diverse and original perspectives.