09-12-2016, 10:00 PM
*** 13-Sep-16 World View -- As Syria ceasefire begins, Bashar al-Assad quickly rejects it
This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
****
**** As Syria ceasefire begins, Bashar al-Assad quickly rejects it
****
![[Image: g160912b.jpg]](http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com/ww2010/g160912b.jpg)
Map of Syria and Iraq, showing who's in control of different regions (WaPost)
The latest and greatest ceasefire in Syria's war began at 7 pm local
time on Monday, amid reports that the regime of Syria's president
Bashar al-Assad is continuing to drop barrel bombs on civilian
neighborhoods in Aleppo.
It's never been entirely clear whether or not al-Assad was accepting
the ceasefire proposal that was imposed by Russia and the United
States, but on Monday, he made a statement that clearly rejected it:
> [indent]<QUOTE>"We as a nation ... are delivering a message that the
> Syrian state is determined to recover all regions from the
> terrorists and restore security, infrastructure, and everything
> else that was destroyed in both human and material aspects.
>
> We come today here to replace the fake freedom they tried to
> market at the beginning of the crisis ... with real freedom, not
> the freedom that begins with them and is sustained by dollars
> ... and by some promises of positions."<END QUOTE>[/indent]
If you look at the map above, you can see that the al-Assad regime and
the opposition rebels (the "Sunni insurgents") are together fighting
over a western region that's only a small fraction of Syria, and that
al-Assad is not in control of the overwhelming portion of Syria.
The region colored green, which is controlled by Kurdish forces, is
much larger, if you count the portions under Kurdish control in both
Syria and Iraq. The so-called Islamic State (IS or ISIS or ISIL or
Daesh) also controls large sections of Syria and Iraq, and those
are totally out of reach of the al-Assad regime.
So the ceasefire agreement, if implemented, might leave al-Assad
still in power, but only in control of a small fraction of the
country. And al-Assad is clearly not willing to accept that.
The second portion of al-Assad's statement promises to replace "fake
freedom they tried to market at the beginning of the crisis ... with
real freedom." There's some confusion about what this statement
means, and I've actually seen different translations in different
reports, but here's my interpretation of what it means.
When the crisis began early in 2011, there was no ISIS, no al-Nusra,
and no Free Syrian Army. There were just peaceful protests, demanding
what al-Assad is now calling "fake freedom." There are peaceful
protests in Washington, London, Paris, and other cities. Suppose
there were a "Black Lives Matter" protest on the Washington Mall, and
President Obama responded by calling out the army and air force to
shoot and bomb the protesters, as well as the cities in which the
protesters live.
It's a bizarre concept, but that's what al-Assad did in 2011, and this
brings me to a contradiction that's been bothering me for years.
Suppose there were some peace agreement, and everyone stopped
fighting. What would happen if Syrian civilians began peaceful
protests again? -- which is what would happen in a generational
Awakening era. I'm guessing that the psychopathic Bashar al-Assad
would start shooting and bombing civilians again.
So this week we have a ceasefire deal reached in Geneva by the United
States and Russia. But there are no penalties for violations, in
particular, no violations for continuing air strikes and barrel bombs
launched by the al-Assad regime. And neither al-Assad nor any of the
opposition groups have endorsed the deal anyway. Indeed, the US State
Department on Monday had to go out of its way to deny that the US and
Russia would have any control whatsoever on Syrian regime airstrikes.
As usual in the media, there always has to be "good news" and "hope."
Today's version is that most of the fighting seems to have stopped at
least for the time being. We'll have to see how long it lasts.
Washington Post and ARA News (Syria) and VOA
Related Articles
****
**** Confusion grows over role of al-Nusra Front in US-Russia peace plan
****
When jihadists from around the world began pouring into Syria in 2013
to fight Bashar al-Assad, many of them joined al-Qaeda linked Jabhat
al-Nusra (al-Nusra Front). However, as the trickle of jihadists
turned into a flood, there was a split between al-Nusra and a new
jihadist group, the so-called Islamic State (IS or ISIS or ISIL or
Daesh). There were two major differences between the two jihadists
group.
The first difference was that ISIS refused to pledge allegiance to
al-Qaeda, while al-Nusra continued its allegiance to al-Qaeda.
The second difference was that al-Nusra has always been an
organization of almost exclusively Syrian fighters, while ISIS has
fighters from all over the world. However, members of the Free Syrian
Army and other "moderate" rebel groups did not want to be associated
with any jihadist group, either al-Nusra or ISIS.
In July, al-Nusra announced that it would split with al-Qaeda, and
rename itself Jabhat Fateh al-Sham (JFS - Front for the Conquest of
Syria). The announced objective was to become more acceptable to the
moderate rebel groups in Syria, and also to become more acceptable to
the international community.
The United States announced that JFS was still considered to be a
terrorist organization. The US airstrikes have continued to target
JFS, and last week the US announced that an airstrike had killed Abu
Hajer al Homsi (alias Abu Omar Saraqeb), a top JFS commander.
However, JFS's split with al-Qaeda has made any discussion of a peace
agreement more complicated. An objective of the US-Russia ceasefire
deal is that FSA and "moderate" rebel groups should be spared, while
jihadists should continue to be targeted. But now JFS and FSA are
working more closely together in fighting al-Assad. Insofar as
they've merged, the distinction between moderate and jihadist fighters
has gotten even more complicated, and makes it even less likely that
any ceasefire will last for long. Reuters (9-Sept) and The National (UAE) and Al-Monitor
Related Articles
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Syria, Bashar al-Assad, Aleppo,
Islamic State / of Iraq and Syria/Sham/the Levant, IS, ISIS, ISIL, Daesh,
Jabhat al-Nusra, al-Nusra Front, Free Syrian Army, FSA,
Jabhat Fateh al-Sham, JFS, Front for the Conquest of Syria,
Abu Hajer al Homsi, Abu Omar Saraqeb
Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal
John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe
This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
- As Syria ceasefire begins, Bashar al-Assad quickly rejects it
- Confusion grows over role of al-Nusra Front in US-Russia peace plan
****
**** As Syria ceasefire begins, Bashar al-Assad quickly rejects it
****
Map of Syria and Iraq, showing who's in control of different regions (WaPost)
The latest and greatest ceasefire in Syria's war began at 7 pm local
time on Monday, amid reports that the regime of Syria's president
Bashar al-Assad is continuing to drop barrel bombs on civilian
neighborhoods in Aleppo.
It's never been entirely clear whether or not al-Assad was accepting
the ceasefire proposal that was imposed by Russia and the United
States, but on Monday, he made a statement that clearly rejected it:
> [indent]<QUOTE>"We as a nation ... are delivering a message that the
> Syrian state is determined to recover all regions from the
> terrorists and restore security, infrastructure, and everything
> else that was destroyed in both human and material aspects.
>
> We come today here to replace the fake freedom they tried to
> market at the beginning of the crisis ... with real freedom, not
> the freedom that begins with them and is sustained by dollars
> ... and by some promises of positions."<END QUOTE>[/indent]
If you look at the map above, you can see that the al-Assad regime and
the opposition rebels (the "Sunni insurgents") are together fighting
over a western region that's only a small fraction of Syria, and that
al-Assad is not in control of the overwhelming portion of Syria.
The region colored green, which is controlled by Kurdish forces, is
much larger, if you count the portions under Kurdish control in both
Syria and Iraq. The so-called Islamic State (IS or ISIS or ISIL or
Daesh) also controls large sections of Syria and Iraq, and those
are totally out of reach of the al-Assad regime.
So the ceasefire agreement, if implemented, might leave al-Assad
still in power, but only in control of a small fraction of the
country. And al-Assad is clearly not willing to accept that.
The second portion of al-Assad's statement promises to replace "fake
freedom they tried to market at the beginning of the crisis ... with
real freedom." There's some confusion about what this statement
means, and I've actually seen different translations in different
reports, but here's my interpretation of what it means.
When the crisis began early in 2011, there was no ISIS, no al-Nusra,
and no Free Syrian Army. There were just peaceful protests, demanding
what al-Assad is now calling "fake freedom." There are peaceful
protests in Washington, London, Paris, and other cities. Suppose
there were a "Black Lives Matter" protest on the Washington Mall, and
President Obama responded by calling out the army and air force to
shoot and bomb the protesters, as well as the cities in which the
protesters live.
It's a bizarre concept, but that's what al-Assad did in 2011, and this
brings me to a contradiction that's been bothering me for years.
Suppose there were some peace agreement, and everyone stopped
fighting. What would happen if Syrian civilians began peaceful
protests again? -- which is what would happen in a generational
Awakening era. I'm guessing that the psychopathic Bashar al-Assad
would start shooting and bombing civilians again.
So this week we have a ceasefire deal reached in Geneva by the United
States and Russia. But there are no penalties for violations, in
particular, no violations for continuing air strikes and barrel bombs
launched by the al-Assad regime. And neither al-Assad nor any of the
opposition groups have endorsed the deal anyway. Indeed, the US State
Department on Monday had to go out of its way to deny that the US and
Russia would have any control whatsoever on Syrian regime airstrikes.
As usual in the media, there always has to be "good news" and "hope."
Today's version is that most of the fighting seems to have stopped at
least for the time being. We'll have to see how long it lasts.
Washington Post and ARA News (Syria) and VOA
Related Articles
- Syria's civilians fear worse violence from US-Russia 'ceasefire' agreement (11-Sep-2016)
- US and Russia agree to a farcical 'cessation of hostilities' in Syria (12-Feb-2016)
****
**** Confusion grows over role of al-Nusra Front in US-Russia peace plan
****
When jihadists from around the world began pouring into Syria in 2013
to fight Bashar al-Assad, many of them joined al-Qaeda linked Jabhat
al-Nusra (al-Nusra Front). However, as the trickle of jihadists
turned into a flood, there was a split between al-Nusra and a new
jihadist group, the so-called Islamic State (IS or ISIS or ISIL or
Daesh). There were two major differences between the two jihadists
group.
The first difference was that ISIS refused to pledge allegiance to
al-Qaeda, while al-Nusra continued its allegiance to al-Qaeda.
The second difference was that al-Nusra has always been an
organization of almost exclusively Syrian fighters, while ISIS has
fighters from all over the world. However, members of the Free Syrian
Army and other "moderate" rebel groups did not want to be associated
with any jihadist group, either al-Nusra or ISIS.
In July, al-Nusra announced that it would split with al-Qaeda, and
rename itself Jabhat Fateh al-Sham (JFS - Front for the Conquest of
Syria). The announced objective was to become more acceptable to the
moderate rebel groups in Syria, and also to become more acceptable to
the international community.
The United States announced that JFS was still considered to be a
terrorist organization. The US airstrikes have continued to target
JFS, and last week the US announced that an airstrike had killed Abu
Hajer al Homsi (alias Abu Omar Saraqeb), a top JFS commander.
However, JFS's split with al-Qaeda has made any discussion of a peace
agreement more complicated. An objective of the US-Russia ceasefire
deal is that FSA and "moderate" rebel groups should be spared, while
jihadists should continue to be targeted. But now JFS and FSA are
working more closely together in fighting al-Assad. Insofar as
they've merged, the distinction between moderate and jihadist fighters
has gotten even more complicated, and makes it even less likely that
any ceasefire will last for long. Reuters (9-Sept) and The National (UAE) and Al-Monitor
Related Articles
- Syria's Al-Nusra splits with al-Qaeda, becoming Jabhat Fateh al-Sham (29-Jul-2016)
- From 2013: The history of how Syria's Bashar al-Assad created ISIS (07-Sep-2016)
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Syria, Bashar al-Assad, Aleppo,
Islamic State / of Iraq and Syria/Sham/the Levant, IS, ISIS, ISIL, Daesh,
Jabhat al-Nusra, al-Nusra Front, Free Syrian Army, FSA,
Jabhat Fateh al-Sham, JFS, Front for the Conquest of Syria,
Abu Hajer al Homsi, Abu Omar Saraqeb
Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal
John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe
