When will the Syria matter be settled? No one has a definitive answer, but the majority are saying that a political solution will come before the end of the year. That is if this is not undermined by developments that would impose militarization.
As dark and murky as the quagmire in Syria has become, it is incumbent on the U.S. to do what it can to actualize the one shred of clarity that has arisen from the chaos: Assad must go, and that is not open to compromise.
The failure to stop the Syrian crisis stems from the international community's unwillingness to take stern measures to end the killing while it continues to take cover under the Annan plan and mouths verbal condemnations of the Assad regime.
Administration officials keep gravitating to the simplistic assertion that when it comes to Syria, there is no Plan B since Plan B may compel direct military intervention. But I can drive a ten-wheeler between existing U.S. policy and putting boots on Syrian ground.
It's hard to mask the fact that so much of this campaign was less about Egypt's future economic challenges, and far more about the role of religious and political Islam coursing through Egypt's body politic.
What Kofi Annan and his team should think of is the need to distinguish between the failure of the plan and the failure of the man on the one hand, and the thwarting of the six points stated in the man's plan on the other. This mandate is first and foremost meant for Syria and its fate.
The collapses of authoritarian regimes of the last 15 months should have taught U.S. policymakers one lesson: the old formula of tolerating and colluding with authoritarianism in return for (an often illusory) stability does not work.
An improved military cooperation means an enhanced political relationship which would help reconsidering this part of the world as an opportunity for the dialogue of civilizations rather than simply a mere threat to Western security.
An absence of imaginative, strategic diplomacy as the year-long crisis in Syria unfolded has caught the U.S. with dwindling options as the oxymoronic UN ceasefire collapses. Consequences abound as a result for U.S. interests across the region.
In this second year of Syria's so-called Arab Spring bloodbath its déjà vu all over again at 1600 Penn. While Syria is not Srebrenica, there are eerie similarities in how this Obama team is hopelessly caught up in a Bosnian-style policy vacuum circa 1995.
As this week marks the anniversary of the Syrian uprising in March 2011, the sad conclusion is that all the concerned parties have miserably failed to live up to their obligations to protect civilian protesters from being ruthlessly massacred for seeking their freedom.
As the situation continues to spiral out of control, adult supervision is desperately needed. And this is a role that the U.S. (with the Arab League and Turkey) and Russia and China can attempt to play.
The Gulf-Western alliance has taken the decision to confront Russia on the issue of Syria, and it presumes that the regime will be gone by the end of the year. Indeed, the strategy to implement this has been set in motion.
After the campaigns in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, there's no excuse for not thinking hard about unforeseen developments and about whether there exists the requisite will to deal with them if they materialize.