It could work, but neither Iran nor Russia would allow it. After all, if Assad falls, then Tehran knows that it's next in line, so they're going to defend Damascus to the very end. The same goes for Putin, although for different reasons. As a staunch defender of national sovereignty, self determination and international law, the Russian president will eventually realize that he can't back down, that if he doesn't stand up to US aggression in Syria, his credibility as leader of the new multipolar global system will be in tatters. He can't afford to let that happen. Russia will have to get involved.
So this is where the rubber meets the road, where Moscow and Tehran finally face off with Uncle Sam. Of course, there doesn't have to be a confrontation. There are other options. Iran is promoting a four-point plan that calls for an immediate cease-fire, the creation of a national unity government, a rewriting of Syria's constitution to include the majority of Syrian ethnic groups and new national elections under international supervision. It's a good plan and it's the best way to stop the violence and end the crisis. But the US isn't going to sign-on to Iran's peace deal. No way. Washington wants regime change and it's not going to stop until Assad is gone. That means there's going to be a war, a war that will pit the United States against Syria, Iran and Russia.
Has anyone in Washington even thought about what that might mean?
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
4
2
2
