The Syrian Observatory For Human Rights

Let Europe lead the war in Syria: History counsels caution for American troops

BY

 

A wave of bellicose media, congressional and independent critics have scoffed at the idea that France and the European Union should lead the fight to dismantle ISIS within Syria — suggesting instead the U.S., in the spirit of its 2001 invasion of Afghanistan, go in with ground troops and guns blazing. But not only have these critics offered no effective alternative, they are missing key considerations that make a proposed American-led ground action in Syria potentially disastrous.

First, we must remember that France, Belgium and the European Union were the targets of the home-grown terrorists who were acting in ISIS’ name. We should make no mistake that recent attacks were a clear indictment of the European security vacuum that grew out of the Shengen Treaty of 1985, which suspended European border security checks.

Many observers have said that the attacks were also an indictment of Europe’s treatment of its Muslim minorities; there is much truth to this.

But however you view it, Europe was the victim, just as America was the victim on 9/11. And vengeance belongs to the victim, not to the ally that the victims have always relied on for defense.

Nor is it impractical to ask Europe to undertake this action: France, Germany, Britain and other European nations have large and effective armed forces that they can bring to bear on the problem at the proper time. But first, France’s Commandement des Opérations Spéciales in particular, which includes men of Muslim background, must infiltrate Syrian society, much as our own men did prior to the Afghan invasion.

Which brings us to the Syrian situation itself. As the downing of a Russian fighter jet by Turkey and the murder of a parachuting pilot by supposed Syrian “freedom fighters” suggest, we do not know what the realities on the ground are or would be if we blindly invaded. The CIA has once again fallen down in this regard, proving confounded by the Syrian situation in a manner that is reminiscent of some of their greatest failures of the past, including the “slam dunk” assessment of Iraq in 2002.

We will only come to understand what is happening in Syria when men who speak the language and can ethnically pass as natives get into place, determine just who we should be helping, and guide bombs to precise locations with laser “painting.”

But what of our work with the Kurds, some critics ask. Isn’t that proving effective? It is — but the Kurds are an identifiable group in a defined area, many of whom happen to speak excellent English and with whom the American military established strong relations during the Iraq War. The analogy between that exception and the rule of a badly confused and dangerous Syria is flawed.

There is another problem with evoking the Afghanistan invasion: America had no imperial past to atone for there. If anyone is going to try to sort out the Syrian mess, it ought not be the U.S., or increasingly nefarious Russia, but the countries that drew up the Sykes-Picot treaty of 1916 that created the selfish and stupid national boundaries of the Middle East in the first place.

The tribes of Syria and Iraq bitterly recall Sykes-Picot, just as they recall the Crusades, facts lost on American saber-rattlers. It is for the signatories to that agreement to expunge their guilt by ridding the region of the scourge of ISIS.

Last and perhaps most importantly, there are the weaknesses of both America’s conventional forces and our national will for another war in the Middle East. This factor holds especially true for a large ground action that cannot be justified failing an ISIS attack on our own soil. We can play a supporting role, to be certain; but for the Europeans to ask more is finally asking too much.

They must take the lead in solving not only the problem of ISIS in Syria, but just as critically (as we have seen), among their own domestic Muslim populations. It is time for them to act, with all the resolve that the U.S. displayed after we were attacked on 9/11.

 

 

NEW YORK DAILY NEWS