iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Dr. Josef Olmert

GET UPDATES FROM Dr. Josef Olmert
 

Ceasefire in Syria? You Must Be Kidding

Posted: 04/10/2012 11:23 am

Today was supposed to be the start of the much-anticipated ceasefire in the Syrian civil war, declared by the former UN Secretary General, Kofi Anan. Ceasefire in Syria? An oxymoron, and a very tragic one. Yesterday, as was announced by the most reliable Syrian opposition group, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, 155 people were killed. They were killed in Aleppo, the suburbs of Damascus, Hammah, Idlib, Deir-a-Zor and Dar'a. All are Sunni areas, and all were supposed to be pacified already, if we are to believe official Syrian announcements.

Well, the civil war is far from over, the rebellion continues, and in the early hours of today more casualties are registered due to the relentless attacks of tanks, which are not supposed to be in the towns, according to the Anan plan. So, this plan was stillborn, and no surprise at all about that.

Anan's initiative was, to start with, a typical UN plan, using the widely-used and completely meaningless mantra about "political solution being the only possible solution," a nice but totally unrealistic slogan. On this occasion, when the plan is already collapsing, it is important to remind us all of the true nature of the struggle in Syria, what really is happening there, and why the standard UN "political solution" is just a euphemism to empty words. In Syria there is a struggle of life or death between a minoritarian regime and a majority of the population who fight over complete control of the country. The Alawites in control of Syria know very well that after four decades of systematic oppression of the Sunni majority, their downfall may be the prelude to a long night of sectarian bloodshed aimed at them.

For the vast majority of the Alawite community, the question is no more the fate of one particular Alawite clan, that of the Assads. Much more is at stake -- their very existence -- and they are signaling to us all that they are ready to do whatever it takes to remain in power. "Whatever it takes" means exactly that, and we haven't witnessed the worst yet, nor are we even close to that point. The regime knows that "real" pacification of the rebel areas, basically the vast majority of Syria's territory, requires much more than what has already transpired. As predicted in this blog before, violence in Syria will dwarf anything that we have witnessed until now either there, or in any other Middle Eastern country.

The regime is sophisticated enough to try and be seen as if being ready to take part in international initiatives to solve the crisis, such as the Anan plan. They want and need to gain time. Time is of the essence in pursuing the survival strategy of the Alawite community. So, every opportunity that the regime has to gain some of it will be fully exploited by them. Ceasefire, in itself an admission by the regime that it is engaged in a major struggle, is a very flexible notion in the annals of the Middle East. In neighboring Lebanon, during the civil war of 1975-6, there were tens of ceasefires. So, we should not be surprised if the Assad regime will play this kind of game also in dealing with its own civil war.

That means that Kofi Annan will find himself more times in the guest room of Bashar Assad's presidential palace, and why not? The regime will bestow on him all the pleasantries which they can master, and in the meantime, the killing machines of Division 4 and other special units will continue to work, and everybody should know by now what that means.

I, for one, suspect that Kofi Annan himself knows that a real political solution In Syria, based on compromise and power-sharing, is out of the question; and I also believe that he is experienced enough to know that a Noble Peace Prize is not awaiting him, not this time, and not so far as Syria is concerned.

Judging by the reactions of other key players -- Turkey, the US and Arab countries -- it is clear that they too do not believe that something good can and will emerge out of the Annan plan, so why wait? The carnage is just going to intensify, and the Syrian people deserve more -- much more -- than the futile attempts to persuade Bashar Assad to do what he cannot and does not want to do, which is to relinquish his power peacefully. Even if he thinks about that, his community and the remaining Ba'ath cronies will stop him.

It is time to change the discussion about Syria. Blood is thicker than water, as they say in the Middle East, and too much has already been spilled. It should stop and quickly, but that will not happen through the Annan plan.

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 45
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
07:46 AM on 04/11/2012
How do you have a ceasefire when all sides do not abide by the ceasefire?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rg9rts
Carpe Diem! This aint rehearsal
05:19 AM on 04/11/2012
Only Annan, who still believes in the tooth fairy, believed that Damascus would live up to the agreement. So what happens now?? .....and the beat goes on......
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
OneTop
Uh, is that a beer hall?
11:01 PM on 04/10/2012
At this point any peace plan is being actively undermined by the house of Saud, the GCC and the West. Using the age old sectarian divide between the Sunnis and the Shias to drive forward to a goal of regime change.

The Saudi's have openly called for arming and helping the Sunnis who oppose Assad. They have also put up over $100 million to pay for revolutionaries/soldiers (mercenaries) while the US has committed to providing night goggles, intelligence and other technical "humanitarian" aid. Now they have attracted every malcontent Sunni extremist from across Africa and only adding to the conflict.
Assad agreed to the cease-fire and the opposition rejected it?

Maliki and the Iraqis see what the plan is and know exactly what is going to happen.

Without significant outside assistance, the opposition cannot defeat Assad with military means, it will never happen. Allowing external players such as the house of Saud those paragons of democracy to arm and pay the opposition is reckless in the extreme.

I agree that Annan's plan is doomed for the bone yard, however, the blood that will be spilled should not be completely laid at the feet of Assad, other all too familiar players are up to their necks in the mess as well.
06:41 PM on 04/10/2012
Assad will never share power without the legitimate threat of a superior power. Because no superior power is willing to flex it's muscle, let alone use it, the killings will continue in Syria until regional players have no other option but to act. Then it will be too late for those who suffered and those who are yet to suffer even more in Syria. If these massacres teach us anything, it should be this lesson: Buy a gun and join the NRA, it is the best protector of democracy.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
scholasticus
I don't have to believe your "-ism".
08:36 AM on 04/11/2012
A gun is no match for helicopter gunships and tank fire.
photo
TommoB
Restore sanity! Add Haldol to fracking fluid...
04:41 PM on 04/10/2012
How many of the deaths from this point forward go to the credit of Mr. Annan?
03:34 PM on 04/10/2012
Arabs going to the streets of their nations to bring down their national leaders has been effective in a number of Arab states. Demonstrators in the streets of Cairo brought down the 32 year reign of Hosni Mubarak. The opposition to the radical leader of Libya, Col. Khaddafi, ended in the death in the streets of Libya to this treacherous dictator. There is an orchestrated effort to also bring down the Syrian leader President Bashar Assad. This revolution that has been moving across the Middle East in the Arab countries is resulting in a new leadership in many Arab states. Only time will tell if the radical Islamist element will come to fill these power vacuums that have been created because of the Arab Spring.

However, Bible prophecy does give us insight into the future for at least 3 of these Arab nations: Syria, Egypt, and Libya. The ancient Jewish prophet Daniel wrote many years ago that these 3 nations would be the first 3 to make a move to destroy the Jewish state of Israel (Daniel 11:40-43). The king of the north and the king of the south in verse 40 are identified as Syria and Egypt early on in chapter 11 (Daniel 11:5-20). Libya is mentioned in Daniel 11:43.

The results of the Arab Spring in Syria, Egypt, and Libya are indeed setting the stage for Bible prophecy to be fulfilled.
05:04 PM on 04/10/2012
Fairy tales to explain current events.
01:49 AM on 04/11/2012
"However, Bible prophecy does give us insight into the future"

You sound like need a good smite of two.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Law101
My micro-bio is now full.
03:22 PM on 04/10/2012
We need to face the reality of the situation and gather an international coalition without Russia and China to stop this madness asap.

The first thing would be to put an arms blockade to prevent Russia from resupplying tanks, guns, and other weapons.

Second thing is to establish a humanitarian corridor to allow peaceful evacuation of innocent civilians.

Next, a no-fly-zone should be implemented to allow for air strikes on hostile military targets who are targeting civilians.

I think we can all agree that military intervention, although costly, is much more preferrable than allowing genocide.
08:49 PM on 04/10/2012
Why don't you go to walmart, buy a gun, and send yourself over there to participate in the Syrian civil war then?

This is not a US national security matter, and we have no business injecting ourselves into that fight.
01:31 AM on 04/11/2012
Very well said. Did you read this Monseigneur delacroix wants full contact, blockade
Russia and while you are it why not China, what the heck let us usher in the new era
with a nuclear conflict and let us go with the fireworks. good luck with freedom fighting
and see you " not " in Syria, put your money where your mouth is and head tomorrow
to Syria. I am sure that the allawis will be more than happy to get some american
fresh meat if you know what I mean.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Law101
My micro-bio is now full.
09:26 AM on 04/11/2012
So we should just use our military to get access to oil and other resources? If women and children are being slaughtered by ruthless dictators, thats their problem?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jill Irish
O seclum insipiens et inficetum!
09:46 PM on 04/10/2012
But doesn't this raise the frightening possibility of "them" forming a coalition as well? It's possible China, especially, doesn't want to go that far, but the risk is there.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Law101
My micro-bio is now full.
09:30 AM on 04/11/2012
No. Russia is not going to risk a war to protect Assad. China is certainly not getting involved.
ThatsTheTheWayItIs
religion, ideology, partisanship are delusional
03:10 PM on 04/10/2012
The article was written too early. Syria just shot at refugees, across the border in Turkey.

Syria just attacked Turkey, a NATO nation. That is an attack on all NATO members, including the US.
The s has just hit the fan. Syria will be attacked, their military likely destroyed within a month.
photo
wom122
Primum non nocere
04:25 PM on 04/10/2012
Turkey has been arming and sheltering Syria's rebels for months. Assad is way too weak to seek war with Turkey, let alone NATO.
02:28 PM on 04/10/2012
What an empty article. The author has no idea what to do. Its sad. Even I, with my non-existent foreign policy experience, have more ideas:

This is a complicated global issue: Russia, Iran, Turkey, and the US have to agree on what military munition should be banned from the Assad regime. They should agree on a long-term plan for Syria that includes autonomy for Kurds in the North-West and Alawites in the traditionally Alawite mountain regions. They should guarantee minority rights. Since Russia is eager to keep Syria as its own satellite, the USA should agree to a Russian-led security council approved multi-national force to police Homs, and other hot spots for a limited decided time (1-2 years) until elections can be held. Although in the short run this may look like a loss by the US, Russians citizens in the long run will hate being involved. Iran should not be allowed to participate in that force (they are already in charge of the Assad army.)

The stick by the west can be a blockade from three sides (Turkey, Iraq and Jordan) in return for added benefits to those three countries.
ThatsTheTheWayItIs
religion, ideology, partisanship are delusional
03:13 PM on 04/10/2012
There is no long-term plan for Assad and Syria, any more than there was for Libya. All Middle East dictators must go, willingly or otherwise. That includes Iran, who is Assad's BFF and only hope. Assad's only power comes from Iranian support. Iran supports all terrorists.
photo
wom122
Primum non nocere
04:23 PM on 04/10/2012
Most of the Middle East dictators are US clients, unless you do not consider monarchs "dictators".
03:35 PM on 04/10/2012
I can understand your frustration, but using ''should'' many times does not help either. We can all compose sentences with ''should'' in them. I am sure the Iranians and the Russians have their ''shoulds' that we might not like.,
02:24 PM on 04/10/2012
Russia supporting syria reminds of when US vetoed all resolutions while Israel was bom bing the heck out of lebenon. I didn't see you writing blog after blog condeming that.
EVAT
Love, Peace and Happiness
02:18 PM on 04/10/2012
So this writer's solution to all the bloodshed is more bloodshed.
This reminds me of a late friend of mine whose cure for his morning hangover was to drink more of what gave him the hangover in the first place, and he never understood why he always had a headache, and was never fully sober. His cure killed him.
Beware America, and don't get conned again.
jhNY
Mercy.
01:59 PM on 04/10/2012
So what course of action does the author favor, undertaken by whom? I can't tell from the article.
03:36 PM on 04/10/2012
I do not think anyone know what to do. States are failing - what to do?
photo
wom122
Primum non nocere
04:26 PM on 04/10/2012
That's easy. More "humanitarian bombing".
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:53 PM on 04/10/2012
The silence of Olmert's pals in the Israeli government on this issue has been deafening. They would clearly prefer a disagreeable Assad than an unpredictable rebel victory. Get with the program, Josef!
07:56 AM on 04/11/2012
I don't believe so. If the anti Syrian rebels win this will separate Syria from Iran and weaken Hezbollah in Lebanon...all for the benefit of Israel.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Law101
My micro-bio is now full.
01:45 PM on 04/10/2012
"The regime knows that "real" pacification of the rebel areas, basically the vast majority of Syria's territory, requires much more than what has already transpired. As predicted in this blog before, violence in Syria will dwarf anything that we have witnessed until now either there, or in any other Middle Eastern country."

Exactly. There will be genocide on a level we have not seen since Hitler until we admit that there is no choice but to intervene militarily. The only question is how much longer it will take for the world to realize this.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jill Irish
O seclum insipiens et inficetum!
02:06 PM on 04/10/2012
They realize it. But Assad's military is still very powerful. So the U.N. seems to need to spin the story for those of us who care.

If the men, women, and children weren't making a feeble attempt to defend themselves, then we'd have a genocide. Because they are, it's "civil war."
EVAT
Love, Peace and Happiness
02:10 PM on 04/10/2012
And when are you and your children and grandchildren if any, joining the marines to go and fight.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Law101
My micro-bio is now full.
02:49 PM on 04/10/2012
So, in your mind, there is never a justifiable reason to use military force?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jill Irish
O seclum insipiens et inficetum!
09:45 PM on 04/10/2012
He said "the world," not us. That's really the point - we cannot always be the powerful saviors because we've got a lot of work to do at home. "The world," at this point, is represented by the U.N. They cannot do anything because Bad Guy Assad is supported by other bad guys and U.N. rules make unilateral action the only alternative unless we want dangerous alliances formed. So "the world" pretends that Assad is a reasonable guy who can "negotiate."
12:45 PM on 04/10/2012
As I have posted many times, it is absolutely necessary for some coalition to depose Assad, and perhaps the Ba'ath Party, by military intervention. The Syrian military is not as good as Iraq's in the 1st Gulf War in 1991. With U.S. support, a coalition, along with the Arab League , can set a precedent for eventual intervention in Russia, as Iran will back down rapidly. Allowing Assad to continue his action is a dangerous precedent for future world stability, as the next tyrant (Putin) will actually cause a world war.
EVAT
Love, Peace and Happiness
02:21 PM on 04/10/2012
What on earth are you going on about? Do you even know? And by the way, when are you joining the U.S. army to go and give that support you are talking about?
photo
AskandThink
OWS! Because WAR is HELL!
10:59 AM on 04/18/2012
YOU served evat?
02:25 PM on 04/10/2012
so you want to start wwIII?
11:31 AM on 04/11/2012
By stopping Syria and other dictators, Russia will back down and WWIII will be avoided. Why don't you read a little history instead of taking peace lessons from Russian propagandists?