WINEP's take: "The FSA is not perfect—it may not even be good", but let's arm it anyway!

Via FLC

ah... the recommendations of WINEP/AIPAC and friends ... They 'succeeded' in Iraq & would like a repeat in Syria.

"... While the SNC appears hapless, lately the FSA, which has little interest in being answerable to the SNC, has been taking positive steps to try and establish a more unified command. The FSA has largely been a franchise operation of around fifty battalions fighting the regime absent any centralized control, but in early March two rival officers vying for leadership of the FSA reconciled and issued a joint statement on YouTube directing troops to follow the orders of just one commander, Colonel Riad al-Assad. Even the SNC has started to come around to supporting the FSA, going so far as to establish a military council to support the force.

But, paralyzed by concerns about whether civilians will eventually have control over the military in post-conflict Syria, Washington has balked on providing military support to the FSA. When asked last week about the military opposition getting its “act together,” State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland changed the topic. “What we have been calling for,” she said, “is for the peaceful opposition to coordinate better … so a peaceful transition can go forward.”
Such inaction has consequences. In recent weeks, the FSA has suffered a series of tactical setbacks, raising the specter of a lengthy war of attrition and prolonged survival of the regime......

Like Washington, Labwani is also apprehensive about the future of Syria, but he has concluded that a two-tiered strategy of supporting both liberal politics and military action would be the best way to end the regime and stave off a post-Assad Islamist takeover. In a recent article posted on Fikraforum.org, a bilingual Arabic-English blog on democracy and reform (the site is affiliated with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, where I work), Labwani lamented the political trajectory of the Syrian uprising, away from “democracy and modernity … towards a renewed form of [religious] despotism.” To reverse this trend, he proposed establishing a more balanced Transitional National Assembly that better reflects the opposition on the ground in Syria—the “democracy activists who embody the will of the people to stand up to despotism and brutality”—and “adopting an organized armed struggle that is national and non-partisan, with financial, logistical and political support of friends.”

It would be so much easier for Washington if the Syrian opposition was disciplined and united like the Libyan Transitional National Council was, at least before they took power. Alas, a truly cohesive Syrian political and military opposition is not on the horizon. Instead of spending months trying to integrate these disparate groups, Washington would be better advised to lower the bar and err on the side of action.

As it is, when it comes to the Free Syrian Army, the administration is letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. The FSA is not perfect—it may not even be good. But the alternative—a diminished and increasingly Islamist opposition facing a resurgent Assad regime—is much worse."

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian  
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this Blog!