This has "bad idea" written all over it:
The United States and Russia early Saturday announced a breakthrough agreement on Syria that foresees a nationwide cease-fire starting on Monday, followed a week later by an unlikely new military partnership targeting the Islamic State and al-Qaida as well as the establishment of new limits on President Bashar Assad's forces.
So now we will fight Assad's enemies at the side of Russia. Will we use barrel bombs and chemical weapons, too?
Russian foreign minister Lavrov is happy:
"This is just the beginning of our new relations," Lavrov said.
Clearly, this new "reset" has a better basis of success--we backed down completely:
[The] new arrangement [promises] a new U.S.-Russian counterterrorism alliance, only a year after Obama chastised Putin for a military intervention that U.S. officials said was mainly designed to keep Assad in power and target more moderate anti-Assad forces.
So now America is committed to fighting alongside Russia against the enemies of Assad.
Lavrov really is getting the most of Russia's best foreign policy asset ever.
And the revolution in American policy--from red line to Potomac Awakening--is complete.
Now let's see if Russia completely rubs our nose in this mess by invading Ukraine (again) this month.
UPDATE: The local allies we lead from behind were not consulted:
Syria's mainstream political opposition said on Saturday it had not received a copy of the U.S.-Russian peace deal and would only react after consulting members, some of whom have expressed scepticism about the success of the deal.
Oh well. Eggs and omelets. Like they even have a tenuous grasp of nuance!
UPDATE: Strategypage doesn't have a lot of confidence in Russian-backed "ceasefires."
But is this even remotely correct now?
The United States, other European and Arab nations are there to overthrow Assad and destroy ISIL. [emphasis added]
Yes, there are Arab nations who want to overthrow Assad. But do Europeans value overthrowing Assad more than somehow trusting someone, somehow, to stop the migrant flows even if Assad has to win to do that?
And does America still seek the defeat of Assad? I don't see that. And I never have seen that as an objective despite the presidential words that it was time for Assad to leave office.
UPDATE: So now we will be held responsible for barrel bombs and chemical attacks:
The United States and Russia could approve Syrian government airstrikes as part of a new nationwide cease-fire, Secretary of State John Kerry said Monday. It's the closest any American official has come to suggesting indirect U.S. cooperation with President Bashar Assad since the civil war started five years ago.
It must be so demoralizing to be someone--like Syrian rebels--who counts on American support for your every lives.
