The departure of al-Qaida-affiliated fighters from Iraq to join the rebellion against Syrian President Bashar Assad in Syria has had one benefit, Iraqi officials say: Violence has dropped in this country, in some areas by as much as half in just a few months.
This doesn't mean the resistance to Assad is an opportunity for jihadis to seize control of Syria:
The U.S. is concerned that al Qaeda is operating in Syria. It's true that Iraqi Sunni Arabs have been entering Syria to join the fighting, and some of these men probably belonged to terrorist groups in Iraq. But it's also true that Syria has suffered several incidents of terror attacks over the last five years. These were believed to be carried out by one of the many Islamic terror groups that Syria has given sanctuary to over the decades. ... But keep in mind that al Qaeda trashed its reputation in Iraq during the last decade, because of so many attacks on civilians. Al Qaeda may be temporarily welcomed by the Syrian rebels, but as soon as the Assads are gone, any popularity for Islamic terrorists will dissipate. Many of these thugs still work for the Assads, and have been sheltered by the Assads for decades.
As an aside, Sunni Arab Iraqis are taking the opportunity for some payback.
Justifying a hands-off approach to Assad just because al Qaeda is fighting him makes as much sense as refusing to take sides against Hitler because Stalin fought Hitler. That has been Assad's line all along, recall.
But if you insist on "multi-lateral" military alliances as a superior alternative to unilateral operations, never forget that "multi" leaves room for unsavory characters.
