Syrian Civil War Developments

[cyppok]

Civil War 101. You need two of three things to win a civil war. Guns, money, and the people.

Assad still have the guns. He lost the people. And he is rapidly losing the money.

I just showed you that the people, self-defense brigades whom in essence fracture cities on controlled and non-controlled zones are working with the Syrian Government, ergo he lost the people backing insurgents but the population stratified and those wanting continued peaceful existence back him. This is not very good because it leads to the opposition being systemically pushed out of the country not just by the Army but their neighbors whom simply defend their areas from insurgency proliferating.

Control is very much present within the Syrian state since the only opposition is forced to operate from beyond boundaries and their internal struggle is now limited and suppressed not just by the center but by their own neighbors.

Jad the army has no reason to stand down if the officer core is favorable to the regime. What we have been hearing about these defection is a general and some officers leave to Turkey or some other place, thus far no troops defected to remain inside the country to oppose the regime. I am guessing most of those whom left have already secured some monetary backing outside by siphoning of funds or external recompense. Also we do not know which divisions those generals commanded or were in charge of, if its a frivolous command with no real power its a frivolous defection with no real impact.


The problem with those army units that defect Jad is they are forced out of the country after everything around them goes against by defending self-interests. I get this feeling that the insurgency is at a stale mate and once the populous are armed and do not care about motives but only peace and self-preservation not only will the tide turn to favor the government most of the opposition will end up walled off from the civilians by not just ideology but motive and reality. Then the government will simply shell the cauldrons off into oblivion and the insurgency is more or less done.

[Officer of Engineers]

What you are seeing is warlordism. The same kind of thing happened in pre-WWII China and continues to happen in Afghanistan. That Assad has let lose the populace in deciding their fates is not a sign of the people supporting him but rather the opposite, that he had granted independence to those who can raise armies.

It remains to be seen if he can reeled them in afterwards. History suggests that this cannot be done without open warfare. In other words, those self defence brigades can just as easily turn against the Syrian army as they did the rebels.

[JAD_333]

Jad the army has no reason to stand down if the officer core is favorable to the regime. What we have been hearing about these defection is a general and some officers leave to Turkey or some other place, thus far no troops defected to remain inside the country to oppose the regime. I am guessing most of those whom left have already secured some monetary backing outside by siphoning of funds or external recompense. Also we do not know which divisions those generals commanded or were in charge of, if its a frivolous command with no real power its a frivolous defection with no real impact.

The question is, if the revolt spreads and Assad's army weakens, does the army go to the bitter end like in Libya or does it stop short of the ravine?

[cyppok]

What you are seeing is warlordism. The same kind of thing happened in pre-WWII China and continues to happen in Afghanistan. That Assad has let lose the populace in deciding their fates is not a sign of the people supporting him but rather the opposite, that he had granted independence to those who can raise armies.

It remains to be seen if he can reeled them in afterwards. History suggests that this cannot be done without open warfare. In other words, those self defence brigades can just as easily turn against the Syrian army as they did the rebels.

No, not warlordism. Warlords do not phone in to the central government for help like the people in the story to suppress incursion into their neighborhood. This is a cross between neighborhood watch armed and vigilantism. Warlords operate in their own state environments their own laws they make and break. These people do not do that.

See you are looking at it from central government perspective, I am kind of not.

The people who decided to do this vigilanty thugisms they have their own reasons as not being looted or not to be a battleground between government and insurgents. If they support the government via fracturing of areas into self contained peaceful areas and not it makes it easier for government to crack down especially if those people call it in for help and are complicit in support of the status quo. Yes they can but they haven't yet and it doesn't seem likely.

They army doesn't seem to be crumbling, the headlines about defections and the numbers in total are kinda paltry.

[Officer of Engineers]

No, not warlordism. Warlords do not phone in to the central government for help like the people in the story to suppress incursion into their neighborhood. This is a cross between neighborhood watch armed and vigilantism. Warlords operate in their own state environments their own laws they make and break. These people do not do that.

Warlords do not pop out of the blue. They were once loyal government soldiers.

[troung]

No, not warlordism. Warlords do not phone in to the central government for help like the people in the story to suppress incursion into their neighborhood. This is a cross between neighborhood watch armed and vigilantism. Warlords operate in their own state environments their own laws they make and break. These people do not do that.

They "phone in" to "Central Governments" all throughout history - Medieval Europe, the late Tang, late Yuan, Mughals, even during the later years of the Communist Regime in Afghanistan.

[cyppok]

PKK helps Assad to crush Kurdish opposition

PKK helps Assad to crush Kurdish opposition
Damascus incurred the wrath of Ankara by allowing this Kurdistan Workers’ Party flag to be raised near the Turkish border in this June 27 file photo. (Photo: Cihan)
11 July 2012 / SERKAN SAĞLAM , İSTANBUL
The Syrian affiliate of the Kurdistan Communities Union (KCK), an umbrella terror network that includes the Kurdistan Workers' Party's (PKK), abducts and tries members of the Syrian opposition forces in courts it has set up in that country to support the regime of Bashar al-Assad.

Reports from the region indicate that the KCK has set up KCK courts in many areas in Syria. Opposition movement members are first abducted by KCK militants and then taken to houses that are used as interrogation rooms and ad-hoc prisons. The KCK's main instrument in Syria is its affiliated armed group, the Democratic Union Party (PYD), the Syrian version of Turkey's PKK.

Most of the opposition members are supporters of opposition Kurdish groups and the Free Syrian Army (FSA). KCK-PYD militants usually turn these people over to pro-Assad forces after their so-called trials, reports from the region say.

Shortly after protests against the Assad regime started in Syria in January of last year when thousands took to the streets demanding freedom, Kurdish cities such as Haseke, Kamışlı, Afrin, Amuda and Ayn al-Arab joined the struggle. Defenseless civilians in those cities saw the worst and most violent crackdowns. The Assad administration, instead of using war jets and military helicopters to bomb civilians as it did in İdlib, Homs and Hama, chose to allow PYD leader Salih Müslim, who was in PKK camps based in northern Iraq, to move to Syria. The KCK and its armed wing in Syria, the PYD, took on the job of keeping Kurdish-populated areas under control. Many PYD members under arrest were also released at this time. The PYD is working through the main KCK principles the PKK uses in Turkey. The terrorist group has been settled in Syria for seven months now.

Residents and the opposition report that KCK/PYD militants have been armed heavily by the Assad administration and often open fire on crowds during anti-Assad demonstrations in Kurdish towns. The KCK/PYD is in full control of Afrin, a town of 400,000, and some parts of Kamışlı.

Syria would probably arm the Kurds further if an incursion occured to bolster their right flank.
Why Turkey won't go to war with Syria - Opinion - Al Jazeera English

Why Turkey won't go to war with Syria
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has yet to understand the new deal struck between Russia and the US.
Last Modified: 06 Jul 2012 11:45

Very good article for the geopolitical sense and how the Iran-Iras-Syria -> Turkey gas pipeline keeps some heat out since its being built and getting rid of Assad puts in danger it being filled and built for Europe.

[tankie]

And worse

Syrian Forces 'Kill 200' In Assault On Village - Yahoo! News UK

[JAD_333]

Syria conflict: Reports of heavy fighting in Damascus

The BBC's Jim Muir says fighting has intensified in many parts of Syria

15 July 2012 Last updated at 19:46 ET

The Syrian capital Damascus has seen some of the heaviest fighting of the conflict so far, according to reports from activists and residents.

Plumes of smoke were seen rising from the suburbs as the army sought to drive out the Free Syrian Army.

The fighting comes after the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) said the conflict in Syria was now in effect a civil war.

It means combatants across Syria are now subject to the Geneva Conventions.

It had previously regarded only the areas around Idlib, Homs and Hama as warzones.
'Residents fleeing'

The BBC's Jim Muir says the clashes between government forces and Free Syrian Army rebels seem to be creeping ever closer to the heart of Damascus and the centre of the regime's power.

Tanks and mortars were reportedly used on the southern edge of the city, in areas like Tadhamon and Midan and around nearby Palestinian refugee camps.

Residents were said to be fleeing some areas, while in other parts of the city protesters blocked motorways with burning tyres.

[JAD_333]

Syrian Civil War Developments

This thread is devoted to developments in what the Int'l Red Cross is now calling the civil war in Syria. All older threads on the conflict will be merged into this one to preserve continuity of discussion and reporting.


Two other related threads will remain separate.

1) A what-if thread on possible breakup of Syria

http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/wha...tml#post878468


2) A thread dealing with the Syrian claimed shoot-down of a Turkish air force F-4.

http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/mid...ish-f-4-a.html

[JAD_333]

Inside Syria
Nawaf Fares: 'The Syrian regime is dead'
One of Syria's high-profile defectors explains what is really going on inside the corridors of power in Damascus.
Inside Syria

Last Modified: 15 Jul 2012 20:43

Nawaf Fares: 'The Syrian regime is dead' - Inside Syria - Al Jazeera English

[S2]

Where's the line of demarcation between safely disassociating one's role in this regime and becoming a "dead-ender"? I'd welcome those with active intelligence regarding on-going regional issues-once vetted independantly and weighed against possible criminal charges. You've got to bring a lot of real-time intelligence-not just historical perspective-along with little personal culpability to be assured a comfortable life in the west.

Making deals elsewhere within your immediate region? Turkey for instance? Those rules probably change. Then again, you're choosing to live closer to old enemies whom likely still bear grudges.

Then there are the dead-enders. They are those whom hung on too long and/or provide too little value to others. How do they disappear? What nation becomes their Argentina? Or do they go down in flames? What promises of riches and power in a made-over Baathist Syria can Assad dangle before them?

I'd surmise based upon these latest defections that most in the Syrian political, security, intelligence and diplomatic machinery are now executing their final will and testament with respect to Damascus. Not all will defect...nor can. If the choice is to stay then I'd guess we'll see violence on a scale heretofore unseen. The stakes become, starkly, personal survival where you now stand.

[JAD_333]

Where's the line of demarcation between safely disassociating one's role in this regime and becoming a "dead-ender"? I'd welcome those with active intelligence regarding on-going regional issues-once vetted independantly and weighed against possible criminal charges. You've got to bring a lot of real-time intelligence-not just historical perspective-along with little personal culpability to be assured a comfortable life in the west.

The defection of senior generals whihc began weeks ago set the beginning of the line of demarcation. They exposed the existence of genuine opposition within Assad's regime. A few days ago the first genuine hardliner, Nawaf Fares, Syria's ambassador to Iraq, defected. He goes back to the time of Assad's father and was once connected to Syria's police. He can hardly claim to have clean hands. His defection signals that the other end of the line of demarcation is approaching. Assad's remaining stalwarts now have to decide whether to risk being criminalized, which is likely if Assad is toppled by arms.

But there is another way. They have 4 choices: defect, resign, hope Assad can win the civil war, or force Assad out. It seems to me, the latter is the most redeeming course for Assad's inner circle. If enough of them are contemplating defection they could simply 'defect' internally and push Assad out, declare a truce and announce democratic elections.

In that scenario, some of the dead-enders, as you call them, may be arrested for crimes against the people. Scapegoats will be needed to validate the coup makers. What happens to Assad? Unless he can get out and find sanctuary somewhere, he will likely be put on trial.

[Parihaka]

Syria’s Collapse Could Be a Chem Weapon Nightmare

What’s worse than a power-mad dictator with weapons of mass destruction? A power-mad dictator who may be about to lose them. This is the situation the world may soon be forced to face in Syria as the Assad regime begins to crack. It is a potential nightmare that ultimately might lead to the use and proliferation of WMDs across the region.

Despite the rhetoric coming out of Washington, there are no easy solutions to the problem, and beyond the tragic possibility of actual WMD use, how this plays out in the near term could have deep strategic consequences by strengthening the resolve of other nations like Iran to acquire or retain WMDs.

How bad is it? Earlier in the year, reports surfaced out of the Pentagon that it might take up to 75,000 troops to handle Syria’s illicit arsenal. And that’s one of the better scenarios. In the last few days open source reports indicated that the Assad regime is moving Syria’s chemical weapons from their storage locations. This has fueled speculation about possible use against rebel forces and stoked fears of regional proliferation.

Congress is clearly concerned. On Sunday, Sens. McCain, Graham, and Lieberman issued a joint statement expressing their alarm over the movement of the chemical weapons and urged President Obama to “respond accordingly.” House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers recently told the National Journal, “I am convinced that the administration needs to be much more aggressive in its contingency planning regarding chemical weapons.” Of course the military and intelligence communities are monitoring Syrian developments, but prudent options are hard to come by.

So what are the real hazards associated with Syria’s WMD program?


The best open source reporting available from the CIA and groups like the Nuclear Threat Initiative indicate that Syria has a robust, decades-old chemical weapons program that has produced a variety of both mustard and nerve agents for use on multiple weapons systems ranging from missiles, rockets, artillery, and aerial bombs. There is also a great deal of unconfirmed reporting that Syria may also have a biological weapons program, but that the program has yet to produce weapons. The most threatening long-range delivery system that Syria possesses is the North Korean produced 700-km range SCUD-D. This arsenal makes Syria a forbidding regional threat, especially if the regime becomes seriously threatened by the rebellion or outside intervention.

This wouldn’t be the first time that the Assads have allegedly used WMD against their own people. Back in 1982, the Syrian government is believed to have employed hydrogen cyanide gas to suppress a Sunni uprising in Hama, but that was minor compared to today’s events. This is the first time since World War II that the existence of a WMD-armed regime has been threatened. During the first Gulf War when Iraq had WMDs – save the backtalk for the comments section, please — the coalition against Saddam made it clear that its goals were limited to Kuwait and Iraqi use of WMDs would make those goals quickly change. Saddam was never faced with the prospect of “use them or lose them,” which is exactly what Assad faces today. If he uses them against his own people to suppress the growing rebellion, that risks triggering outside intervention from the United States and its NATO allies or Israel. However, Syria has enough missiles to lash out at NATO member Turkey and nearby Israel. How would they respond? The gamble for Assad is the bet that his arsenal is threatening enough to keep outsiders at bay. Another potential scenario for WMD use is if missile troops defect and use WMD against the regime. Or the regime might collapse prompting local commanders to start making their own decisions about using the arsenal in a final spasm of violence.

Eliminating Syria’s WMD is not an easy task either. The facilities are hardened targets — going after them will require the latest bunker-busters. And blowing up chem/bio facilities or missiles means risking releasing the actual agent and creating a humanitarian crisis for those caught downwind.

Beyond airstrikes, the long-term elimination of Syrian WMDs requires a boots-on-the-ground commitment. Open source reporting indicates that Jordanian Special Forces may play a role in securing Syrian WMD sites, but the characterization and elimination of WMD inventories takes hyper-specialized troops. Strategic Command’s newly formed Standing Joint Force Headquarters for Elimination, along with troops from the US Army’s 20th Support Command (CBRNE), are the Pentagon’s go-to assets for missions like this. It was specialists from the 20th who quietly removed 550 metric tons of yellowcake uranium from Iraq in 2008. However, these troops don’t possess the resources to dismantle a state WMD program. Removing relatively benign yellowcake is easy compared to destroying extremely toxic chemical agents like VX. The facilities the United States used to destroy its chemical weapons were basically small factories erected on site, something that tactical military units don’t do.

Then there’s the problem of Syria’s missiles. Many speculate that elements of Assad’s arsenal could find their way into the hands of extremist groups like Hezbollah. My assessment is that the long-range missiles aren’t that much of a terrorist threat. Most of Syria’s long-range missiles are complicated liquid-fueled systems that take specialized troops and facilities to store, fuel, and employ. Transferring them to Hezbollah leaves them vulnerable and risks use that invites massive retaliation.

The real proliferation threat is smaller chemical rockets designed to work with multiple rocket launcher systems, which Syria is thought to possess. The insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan have demonstrated that rockets make a handy tool for asymmetric warfare. If the regime loses control of its arsenals and the weapons find their way into the wild — like what happened in Libya — chemical rockets could be a lingering threat for years. Imagine if extremists were to smuggle a few chemical-tipped rockets across the porous Iraqi border with Syria and fire them from improvised rocket launchers at the sprawling U.S. Embassy complex in Baghdad. Making matters worse is the possibility of former Assad regime WMD experts finding refuge with extremist groups.

The final threat from Syrian WMDs is the menace posed to larger nonproliferation efforts. Regimes seek WMDs for multiple reasons, but the common thread is a deterrent against outside attack. Syrian WMDs create a paradox for the international community looking to stem the spread of WMDs. If the West stays out of Syria, this reinforces the perceived deterrent value of WMDs. This will further fuel the nuclear ambitions of Syria’s ally Iran. However, the reverse scenario is also true. If the West intervenes against Assad and he is forced out of power, this could make nuclear weapons more attractive as well. If chem/bio weapons didn’t deter aggression, then nuclear weapons might.

President Obama has been criticized for not acting in Syria, but WMDs complicate the situation beyond the usual platitudes and easy answers. Few options present themselves for policy makers wishing to “respond accordingly” to the situation. The sad fact is that, as unappealing as the Assad regime may be, doing nothing might be the best answer, at least for now.

(Disclaimer: I am not currently involved in any contingency planning for Syria, and my analysis of the situation and potential military options does not reflect any official position or policy.)

[Double Edge]

What’s worse than a power-mad dictator with weapons of mass destruction? A power-mad dictator who may be about to lose them. This is the situation the world may soon be forced to face in Syria as the Assad regime begins to crack. It is a potential nightmare that ultimately might lead to the use and proliferation of WMDs across the region.

Countdown to an Article 39 UNSC resolution ?