GOOD GRIEF, JOHN KERRY

[Geee]

Powerline:

President Obama has become a laughingstock in Moscow, Beijing, Tehran, and wherever else serious people are paying attention. But it is John Kerry, one suspects, who draws the biggest guffaws.

 

Consider the Syria deal Kerry, with White House approval, presented to Russia in July. According to the Washington Post the proposal was this: the U.S. would share intelligence and coordinate its bombing of terrorists targets with Russia and Russia would ground the Syrian air force and stop its own bombing of U.S.-backed opposition forces.

 

There was zero chance that Russia would ground the Syrian air force and stop its bombing in exchange for what Kerry offered. Russia’s interest in enabling the Syrian regime to conquer key parts of the country that ISIS does not control far exceeds its interest in bombing ISIS. Moreover, if and when Russia chooses to bomb ISIS targets, it can do so effectively enough without obtaining U.S. intelligence, just as it has effectively bombed U.S-backed forces without our help.

 

Kerry’s proposal thus reflected a profound misreading of Russian intentions in Syria.

 

The Russians naturally have not accepted Kerry’s deal. However, they have strung him along to the point that, in late August, Kerry predicted that a deal could be reached within a week.

[Geee]

GOOD GRIEF, JOHN KERRY — PART TWO

 

After months of negotiating with Russia, John Kerry has obtained a “cease fire” agreement in Syria. The Washington Post characterizes the agreement as “the renewal of a cease-fire,” which tells you all you need to know about the value of this deal. Like its predecessors, this agreement was made to be broken as far as Russia is concerned.

Even significant portions of the Obama administration appear not to believe in the agreement. According to the Post, “as Kerry negotiated with the Russians over the past several months, officials at the Pentagon and some at the White House did little to hide their skepticism about the proposed deal.”

Their skepticism is well-founded. Eyal Zisser, a professor of contemporary history of the Middle East at Tel Aviv University and the school’s vice rector, explains why.

Zisser writes:

 

A glance at the details of the agreement reveals a lack of real content and a near-zero chance of implementation. [it] fails to include a large portion of the rebel camp, most notably the Islamic State group and the Nusra Front, and we can assume that the Syrian regime will be quick to violate the terms of the deal, justifying it with the claim that it is fighting these radical rebel groups.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/09/good-grief-john-kerry-part-two.php

[Geee]

SYRIA “CEASE FIRE” ALREADY VIOLATED

 

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/09/syria-cease-fire-already-violated.php