Brookings O’Hanlon proposes partitioning Syria after “moderate” rebels defeat BOTH ISIS+Assad+EVERYONE ELSE
O’Hanlon’s brilliant idea is to partition Syria AFTER “moderate” forces are bolstered and then just go on to defeat BOTH Islamic State AND Assad.
No mention of Iran or Russia or how they would react…. No mention of the other jihadist groups and how they would react etc.
But the last crazy thing about this is that O’Hanlon starts the piece saying that outside intervention – such as by the US – isn’t going to happen. But he then goes on to assume that massive outside support for “moderate” Syrian rebels (little too late on that one!) would be able to defeat EVERYONE ELSE… somehow; and that the will and acceptance of such an idea, which is not there now for intervention, would exist for intervention-by-proxy:
“…Moreover, even this kind of deal would require the defeat or near-defeat of both the Islamic State and Assad, given how divisive and illegitimate each has become. So it would only be possible after moderate opposition forces had been strengthened and made much more military headway than they have so far…”
Imagine – this passes for serious policy ideas in Washington. No wonder Syria became such an incredible mess when the guys advising the US leadership propose fantasies like the above.