The CIA and the Whitehouse are preparing to repeat the Afghan mistake
Political analyst Dmitry Evstafiev — about the dangers of American plans in case of failure of settlement in Syria
Discussion of eligibility conducted by the government of Bashar al-Assad's elections and prospects for maintaining the political process after that, to put it mildly, a bold step is somewhat pushed to the side recently announced with reference to "the CIA analysts" "Plan B" on Syria, which will be used, if the process of political settlement will come to a standstill.
And for good reason
.
At all American maneuvers around the "Plan A", i.e. a ceasefire and a political settlement, are becoming more "frontal". The American administration acts in terms of the increasing time pressure: Barack Obama is less and less time to proclaim himself "liberator in Syria" and remove the last for his presidency image dividends. This is probably the problem: Obama needs success until November, and what will happen next, doesn't matter.
As it turned out, however, to the settlement of the "Plan B" has nothing to do, because it involves building up deliveries of arms to the "moderate opposition", known for its constant flow of "excessive" together with USA money and weapons. And it is very revealing, because the "Plan B" they will admit that their clients in Syria are extremely dubious political prospects.
As the core of "Plan B" are supplying "moderate rebels" of man-portable air defence systems (MANPADS), which must protect the "moderate opposition" from air strikes.
And this is a crucial, decisive moment. American policy in the middle East made a "full circle" and returned to the same political "crossroads", where in 1986 a decision on the supply of MANPADS "stinger" of the Afghan "freedom fighters" as they called Ronald Reagan, the Afghan conflict has got a new dimension.
Recall that it was formed around the U.S. (and Chinese) weapons "Afghan international" was the ancestor of "al-Qaeda" and "spiritual grandfather" of the ISIS organization, which the United States are now waging a selfless struggle. The Americans, of course, correct in their hints that al-Qaida, and not only it was created and operated on Saudi money. What they do not want to remember is the fact that its progenitor, "the Afghan Islamic Internationale", was created by the hands of Americans.
That is, U.S. politics returned to the same point, with almost the same allies, with the same ideas and the same lack of understanding of consequences. Only on a new technological level and the new level of global violence.
And it is very dangerous.
By the way, the perfect American administration is zigzag suggests that not only an image but also the political situation, from the point of view of practical men in Washington, looks at least acutely.
Of course, all major American political advocacy process around Syria together whether such a plan is denied, noting that if it is, then MANPADS will be equipped with some "geo-systems", which will limit the area of their combat use, etc. However, the presence of such a specific "Plan B" was refuted so that inevitably remained osadochek.
He left all understood that the plan is still there, but so far it seems too risky to speak on a level higher than the anonymous "sources in the CIA".
The problem of the American "Plan B for Syria is not that it will lead to destabilization of the entire Middle East. The problem is that the appearance of information about this "Plan B, even for propaganda purposes, as a means of pressure on Russia (to a lesser extent, on Iran and Assad) shows the degree of geopolitical irresponsibility that currently reigns in Washington. There are things even the opponent should not be afraid. The current American administration in seeking to take revenge for the powerlessness in the fields of propaganda wars have crossed a certain "red line", removing the another limiter in the global information war. Which, by the way, she didn't dare move even in the hard times of the war in Eastern Ukraine.
How the US decides to go "red line" in practical politics, while remains under the big question. However, we must remember that irresponsibility is never "focal" is she or is not seen at all, or manifests itself everywhere. It is possible that rumors about a "Plan B" will turn into "real planning" when serious people discuss the pros and cons of the supply of MANPADS and similar weapons.
The bad news is that the lessons of history for US does not exist.
Yes, of course, at that time, in the 1980s and 1990s, for obvious reasons, "Stingers" in American planes are not shot. Shot fostered by Americans "Afghan international" in General, and somewhat later. September 11, 2001. But shot a "big" and hard, plunging the U.S. into a "cycle of violence", which lasts 16 years old soon and every new step reveals a new quality. The Taliban, a direct offspring of the American and Saudi policy of "Afghan international" already look like boy scouts compared to ISIS. And we can only guess what monsters, including "monsters of the mind" can lead to the proverbial "Plan "B".
A key conclusion according to the results of the ballot box "Plan B is that American policy in Syria (and the middle East in General) is becoming more chaotic, more focused on results driven and increasingly unscrupulous and partners. And there are still doubts that Washington will be able to find the strength to get out of the "cycle of violence" in the middle East, which he himself launched.
Simply put, the "window of opportunity" for Russian-American cooperation in resolving the conflict in Syria and Iraq is rapidly closing. If not already closed.
Original : http://izvestia.ru/news/611132
