Ally with Syria to defeat ISIS

In the wake of the much-ballyhooed “Arab Spring,” the Syrian government made multiple concessions to what shortly became terrorist groups under various names – the Free Syrian Army being the most prominently mentioned. In return for its willingness to engage in political dialogue, Syria saw a sharp uptick in terrorist activity, in terms of frequency and severity.

Now, a few years later, following exposure of the degree of collaboration between the Free Syrian Army and Al-Nusra (which, in turn, is closely affiliated with Al-Qaeda), one rarely hears the group name mentioned. Why? Perhaps because it has become a point of major political embarrassment to the United States and its Israeli and Saudi allies.

{mosads}The current U.S. administration and its associated national security apparatus continue to refrain from calling the terrorist groups operating in Syria for what they are: terrorist groups. These are not “rebels,” they’re not “opposition forces,” but terrorists, plain and simple. Indeed, in a recent interview with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad by the Syrian state news agency, he made it painfully clear that the Syrian problems are largely driven by foreign forces, not any legitimate organic political force. Quoting from that article:

But in fact, for this political track to have an effect, it must be between Syrian independent political forces that belong to the Syrian people and have their roots in Syria and Syria alone, unlike what we see now in several of the forces we hold dialogue with that are bound financially and politically to foreign sides.

If the West were truly interested in eliminating ISIS, the most expedient method would be to, first, stop funding, training, and supplying them (and their proxies) and, second, ally with the legitimate Syrian government to realize the full benefit of their direct, first-hand experience and front line intelligence.

At a stroke, this would prove devastating to ISIS, simultaneously relieve much of the human suffering in Syria, vastly improve Syrian military morale, and offer the best alternative to flooding regional and Western countries with unwelcome refugees.

So why isn’t effecting an “alliance of convenience” with Syria the policy of the United States and its allies? Good question and the answer is perhaps found as much in Riyadh and Tel Aviv as in Washington, DC. The role of false front NGOs in preparing the information battlefield is not to be ignored either. Certainly opening dialogue on such an alliance is more amenable to U.S. interests than allying with factions “cleaved” from Al-Qaeda, as recently proposed (disclosed?) by retired Gen. David Petraeus, disgraced former CIA director.

Instead, the United States is now applying its failed strategy of drone strikes to Syria, perhaps in a run up to a larger direct conflict with Iran, as some prominent D.C.-based “think tanks” are wont to propose.

Instances abound of propagating “the big lie” about use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government. Dr. Peter Brookes, in an otherwise insightful article, parroted the U.S. administration propaganda. During the course of the farcical televised GOP “debate” on August 6, 2015, Bret Baier, chief political anchor of Fox News, made a similar statement asserting “overwhelming evidence” of the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime and then posed a loaded question to one of the candidates. Samantha Power, current U.S. ambassador to the UN has made similar assertions.

In each of those instances, timely queries were submitted, asking what evidence they have which would dispute the independent U.N. investigation attesting to the fact that all of Syria’s chemical weapons have been removed. (Moreover, in that same statement, the OPCW recognized the Syrian government for its degree of cooperation.). All such queries remain unanswered.

Surveying the field of declared 2016 U.S. presidential candidates, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) sounded the clarion call over two years ago, regarding the danger of providing United States support to terrorist factions operating in Syria.

It is doubtful that the Syrian people, and the United States security interests, can await another U.S. election cycle. The flow of supplies to ISIS has to cease, and practical, effective measures to reverse the territorial and ideological gains made by ISIS are desperately needed, now.

Schofield is an independent analyst with more than 40 years experience providing services under contract to the U.S. government, including 8 member agencies of the U.S. intelligence community.