Never one to shy away from speaking his mind, Brzezinski, the famous architect of the Afghanistan strategy in the Russia-Afghan conflict is now making a very powerful statement on his stance over the US involvement and level of engagement in the Syrian civil war.
There is a lot of speculation as to why he is talking now, but he is only joining a growing chorus of people, including Lugar, in saying that the U.S. should remain outside the Syrian theater.
He is also saying something that many are agreed on: the idea that setting a red line in the sand by saying that chemical weapon use would be the threshold for US action in Syria was wrong, because it engendered problems both in properly assessing the validity of claims of use of such weapons and in alerting others on how to act, but it also diminishes the death toll of the conflict. It also gives people ideas as to how to provoke US intervention on both sides.
In fact US intelligence conceded last week that small amounts of sarin had been used in Syria.
But Brzezinski contends with good reason that a direct intervention in the Syria territory could prove disastrous to the United States.
First of all such conflicts are by their very nature endless. There is never a clear cut line of demarcation that fixes the end of such conflicts. And it also signifies an involvement that could easily justify wider action from neighboring countries, finally ending in a large scale conflict that could resemble World War II in scope.
In addition, and all diplomatic complications with Asia, aside, the U.S. should not give the impression that it is going to intervene alone or as a chief protagonist.
Partial Source : Bloomberg 5.6.13
No comments:
Post a Comment