How bad does our policy have to be that people might follow Carter's advice?
Iran outlined a general four-point sequence several months ago, consisting of a cease-fire, formation of a unity government, constitutional reforms and elections. Working through the United Nations Security Council and utilizing a five-nation proposal, some mechanism could be found to implement these goals.
The involvement of Russia and Iran is essential. Mr. Assad’s only concession in four years of war was giving up chemical weapons, and he did so only under pressure from Russia and Iran. Similarly, he will not end the war by accepting concessions imposed by the West, but is likely to do so if urged by his allies.
Mr. Assad’s governing authority could then be ended in an orderly process, an acceptable government established in Syria, and a concerted effort could then be made to stamp out the threat of the Islamic State.
Carter actually boasts of how Assad would always talk to Carter (no doubt!) and that before the current unpleasantness, Assad's oppressive regime promoted "harmonious relations" among the various groups in Syria!
And his plan is to build on Iran's proposal in the first step? Which then goes to step 2 of negotiating an orderly transition to an acceptable government (to Iran, Assad, and Russia, remember), to be followed by the step 3 of the defeat of ISIL!
Hmm. This seems so familiar ...
That darned mysterious step 2 that if only we could spell it out would make the farcical step 1 make sense in light of the glorious step 3.
It's come to this. Jimmy Carter is offering solutions to solve our foreign policy problems.
