Your Excellent Analysis of the History of Alawi Syria

Submitted by Robert (United States), Dec 8, 2016 at 14:36

I regret that I caused you to misinterpret my intent.

Although you wrote this long ago, it's an excellent and convincing explanation of Alawi Syria. That's why I made my comment here. I don't know what I wrote that made you believe that I accused you of being an apologist for the Assad. Rather, my view is that we should take a Kissinger-like strategic approach. I don't believe we have a less-brutal approach than the Assad's. I think, as the truism goes, better to accept the Devil you, than gamble on the Demons that might replace him.

This very early article of yours gives an excellent historical perspective from which Tactics and Strategy should be made. And the brutality Assad, son or father, is not a significant fact for guidance.

I choose this space to make my comment, because it is this very article you wrote a long time ago, provides the historical context within which American Middle East foreign policy should be articulated.

Whatever one says about Putin, his support of the establishment of Syria under Assad is correct only because the alternative is far worse. So maybe Trump will cut a deal with Putin, under the condition that the Ayatollah is cut out. I'm thinking of what Bismark would have done when he had to balance Russia and Austria-Hungary against France and Great Britain. Or, what would Henry Kissinger recommend.

Again, this is an inspiring analysis of Syria under the Assad regime, both father and son. So this is the place where one should ask, What is to Be Done About Syria. For one thing, the focus shouldn't be on the mortal Assad who will be dead anyway after his generation comes to an end. But the next generation is doomed to live in the shadow of this legacy. Obama I think is too Good and Moral, and Legal (overlooking national American sovereignty, as Kissinger might observe). So perhaps it's a timely topical arrival of "You're Fired" Donald Trump.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".