> I need time to read and process everything you wrote (the assertion that Daesh is effectively a…
If you’re looking for some ‘good read’ to this topic, see:
> I need time to read and process everything you wrote (the assertion that Daesh is effectively a foreign occupying force in Syria is not one I’ve heard before, so I want to check up on it), but I want to quickly address one point:
If you’re looking for some ‘good read’ to this topic, see:
Shock and Awe (by an ex-US SOF expert on Iraq)
The hidden hand behind the Islamic State militants? Saddam Hussein’s (two absolute ‘must reads’ on the Daesh)
Confession of an ISIS Spy (another ‘must read’), and
I could add loads of additional content all of which states the very same story: Daesh is not Syrian, it is de-facto a foreign occupying force created with plenty of help from Iraqi Ba’athists, Assad, Iranians and Russians, and it actually never even ‘cooperated’ with native Syrian insurgency (at most, it was just waiting for an opportune moment to stab it in the back).
> For the record, I did not miss your assertion that material aid is the key to organizing FSyA, I just don’t think it’s obvious the way you do. The formula “local groups + foreign material aid = cohesive national movement that definitely won’t turn sour at the end” seems to be shaky at best to me. I certainly don’t think that this formula will definitely work, the way you seem to (perhaps there’s a case that ‘ok, it’s not certain but it’s worth a shot anyway since Assad is definitely murderous’, but your remarks seem to indicate a confidence that is unwarranted to me).
OK, then lets see if the ‘formula’ with ‘local groups + foreign material = is really as ‘shaky’ — on another example from Libya. Indeed, let’s see if the ‘formula’ along which ‘every Islamist is Jihadist or at least Jihad-supporter’ is correct, too…
As described earlier, Qatari and Turkish bribing of (primarily) Misuratan militias (‘Libyan Dawn’, aka ‘Fajr’) ruined the democratic process and enabled these militias to ‘capture’ Tripoli. In turn, they were declared ‘Islamists’ and ‘Jihadists’ by the West — although at the same time they were the first in Libya to fight the local branch of the Daesh (indeed, although the Turkey-supported Ansar ash-Sharia was the first to do so).
Ergo: the West looked the other way while Emirati/Egyptian/Jordanian-supported military junta led by Qalifa Haftar coupped himself to power. Didn’t quite work, so he ended in control of ‘eastern Libya only’. But, it did cause the ongoing civil war, back in 2014.
Now, in summer this year, the UN finally managed to get half the (supposedly) ‘Haftar’s government’ to move from Tobruq to Tripolis, and take over as a new, ‘UN-recognized’ government. With US, French and some other support, the Fajr and allied militias — which recognized this new government — then launched a major operation against the Daesh in Syrte.
Theoretically, that’s ‘great’, isn’t it?
Not really.
Namely, their acceptance of the UN-recognized government resulted in the supposed ‘Islamist/Jihadists’ (i.e. Misuratan and allied militias) losing support from Qatar and Turkey.
At the same time, Misuratan and allied militias — with plentiful US-support, though one limited to air strike only (i.e. no provision of military aid, supplies etc.) — de-facto destroyed the Daesh in Libya (currently, they’re fighting for the last neighbourhood of Syrte). However, they assaulted with such gusto that they suffered catastrophic losses too. In the future Misuratan militias are not going to represent any kind of a serious military force.
Meanwhile, Haftar’s force was either entirely ignored by the West or supported by it (at least by French and Italians), while it also continued receiving support from Emiratis/Egyptians/Jordanians.
Mind: at least a quarter of that force, perhaps more than one third of it, consists of so-called Madkhalli Salafists.
What did that force do?
It destroyed supposed ‘Islamists’ in Derna, and then the Ansar ash-Sharia in Benghazi, and then the ‘Petroleum Protection Force’ in Agedabia — while all the time ignoring the Daesh (i.e. flying perhaps a dozen of air strikes against it).
Now it stands as the most powerful — indeed: decisive — military force in Libya, and controls nearly two thirds of it.
Means: the US/Western ‘emphasis’ on Libyans fighting for US/Western interests, combined with failure of providing anything else but air strikes for that battle against the Daesh, has destroyed nearly all of Libyan forces that were actually fighting the Daesh. At the same time, US/Western ignorance of Emirati/Egyptian/Jordanian activity is bolstering Haftar’s military junta (which is including a significant portion of Salafists) and de-facto imposing it in control over most of Libya.
But, you have doubts if the formula ‘local groups + foreign material aid = cohesive national movement’ is valid?
> certainly Assad’s victory will result in a “Reign of Terror” within Syria (whether an anti-Assad victory necessarily results in a Sunni Reign of Terror is what we’re debating now I guess) but I don’t expect the “hotbed of terrorism” part — virtually all terrorist actions against the West are Sunni (the only major exceptions, to my knowledge, are a string of Hezbollah bombings in the ’90s, but they seem to have abandoned this strategy — feel free to correct me about this if I’m wrong though).
Then wait and see. Right now, the IRGC-controlled alliance in Syria is pre-occupied with destruction of the native anti-Assad opposition. The very existence of this opposition is de-facto kept secret (at most: ‘put under a big question mark’) in the West, because it does not fit the image of Syria as a ‘terrorist country’ impressed in the West since ages.
What you can be 100% sure is going to happen should that IRGC-controlled alliance in Syria ‘win’, is that it’s going to turn against its ‘actual’ enemy — namely Israel. And whenever that happens, then everybody is going to scream about ‘existential threats’ and ‘terror’ and whatever else, and complain about how dumb they all were not to see this happening on time…