The Libyan scenario: In this scenario, foreign troops,
presumably NATO, would strike military targets against the regime until its
military capabilities are degraded. Although the SNC, the FSA and other vocal
opposition figures have called for this scenario, NATO and other western
countries have rejected this option despite the fact that some of the GCC
countries have vowed to undertake the cost of the operation. But the military
risks are far greater for NATO, especially in an election year in the US.
Additionally, there are other Syrian opposition groups that have totally
rejected direct foreign intervention.
The Iraqi/Somali scenario: Saudi Arabia and other GCC
countries have been advocating the arming of the FSA and other opposition
militant groups. In this scenario a full-fledged civil war would ensue that
could in all likelihood resemble the breakdown of central authority and
disintegration of the country like Somalia, or create a situation that is
similar to the sectarian Iraqi strife of 2005 and 2006. The carnage and loss of
civilian life in such a scenario could be horrific, and on a grand scale, that
would far surpass the current level of the loss of life. The army and its
shabbiha would then be totally unconstrained as the conflict spreads. In
addition, in this chaos, many armed militias including Al-Qaeda would join, and
the whole region would be inflamed, as the bloody conflict might spill over to
Iraq and possibly across the whole Gulf region. Such conflict could easily turn
into a full-scale Shia'-Sunni violent confrontation with colossal
consequences.
The assassination plot scenario: The advocates of this
scenario call for a clean assassination plot against president Assad. The idea
is that the regime would become very weak and not able to recover. Putting aside
the iniquity of this approach, it is not apparent who would succeed Assad since
his vice president, a Sunni, is not considered loyal enough to the
Alawite-dominated military leaders. Although this scenario could speed up the
collapse of the regime with minimal loss of life, it is not clear how such a
plot could be carried out.
The grand political bargain scenario: Convinced of the regime's inability to prevent the crisis from reaching a military stalemate, this scenario envisions a grand political settlement between Assad's patrons such as Russia or Iran on the one hand, with other international or regional powers such as Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the Arab League, on the other. In this scenario the Obama administration, in need of stable oil prices, especially in an election year, would reach out to Saudi Arabia, which is probably the only player that can guarantee this stability, particularly if Iranian oil is removed from the international market this summer. In return, the US agrees to accommodate Russia's concerns in Georgia and the defense shield plan in Eastern Europe. Another possibility would involve a deal between Turkey and Iran if the latter reaches the conclusion that the Assad regime had become a liability such that its interests would be harmed irreparably if it continues to back him.
Russia or Iran could then convince Assad to step down and go into exile. A serious political dialogue would subsequently take place between the opposition and remnants of the weakened regime. A national unity government would soon after be formed to include all the warring factions in a transitional period to be followed by democratic elections.
The long-term regime attrition scenario: In essence,
the conflict in Syria is a test of wills between the regime and the Syrian
people. For almost a year the Syrian people have demonstrated courage,
determination, and resolve to reclaim their freedom against a brutal and bloody
regime. After a year full of enormous sacrifices, it is unlikely that the will
of the Syrian people could be crushed. The fear of the regime by the people has
been broken, as more people from all walks of life across Syria have taken to
the streets. Despite its enormous military power, the readiness of the army and
security apparatus has been deteriorating daily and cannot be sustained for a
long period of time. The economy is collapsing and soon major commercial strikes
and civil disobedience might spread, paralyzing the country. In all likelihood,
the International Criminal Court will also indict Assad and his senior leaders,
tightening the noose around their necks. In this scenario the combined effects
of all these measures would result in the collapse of the regime and the
disintegration of the exhausted army.
The US committed a grave miscalculation when it invaded Iraq
in 2003. The Bush administration had the illusion that Iraq would somehow become
an American colony, its military base, a client state, or America's gas station.
At the end, it handed over Iraq to Iran on a silver platter as Iran's allies
have taken over the country. Almost a decade later, Iran is committing the same
miscalculation with its unconditional backing of the Assad regime. Whichever
scenario plays out, it is unlikely that Assad would survive, unless Israel
attacks Iran, resulting in a whole new calculus.
Barring this possibility, the question then becomes how would the region look as Assad disappears from the scene: is it the ultimate triumph of people power or a sectarian fire spreading across the entire region?
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
