So it is of no surprise that a member of The Atlantic Council' The Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East is suggesting that the USA "engage" and "manage" Jaish al-Islam, who slaughtered civilians in Adra and filmed the execution of their Islamic State prisoners after IS had executed their JAI prisoners.
Lastly, a US relationship with a group that poses a proximate military threat to Damascus could increase pressure on the regime’s patrons to accept a political transition in Syria. Just as the United States alternatively encourages and restrains its insurgent allies fighting the regime in southern Syria, it could try to do so in the even more critical territory of Damascus. If successful, this would be in line with the US goal of changing the calculus of the regime and its supporters, in favor of a political settlement that excludes Assad.
......The key point is that US interests may well be better served by trying to manage rather than ignoring JAI, which appears here to stay anyway.
As the case of JAI in Eastern Ghouta makes clear, not all of the key local players in Syria are to the United States’ liking. After four years of large-scale violence and destruction, few if any groups in Syria are. Neither the Druze nor the YPG, Southern Front, and Raqqa Revolutionaries Brigade are without their serious flaws. Yet all are important groups who, despite their shortcomings, have something useful to offer to the United States, and some may well be more harmful if ignored. Identifying and harnessing local partnerships and brokering cooperative arrangements are the surest means of securing US interests in Syria, and bringing about a more inclusive and enduring political settlement.
Contact with Jaish al-Islam in #Damascus suburbs can further US goals says @FaysalItani http://t.co/JH3xdoFAQX @acmideast #acsyria
— AtlanticCouncil (@AtlanticCouncil) September 5, 2015Note the mission creep: the tweet suggests 'contact', while the report suggests "manage" and "cooperate".
No comments:
Post a Comment