Here’s a strongly recommended read from international think-tank, the Brookings Institute. As I read the article, I thought that once again, US foreign policy has missed the strategic objective. Like Iraq, US involvement in Syria has been enormously costly but the end-game is far from clear. For a while, Russia looked to be out-foxing the US but the real strategic winner in the Middle East seems to be Iran. Turkey’s continued strategic importance to the US is questionable and probably directly proportional to Turkey’s capacity to curtail Iran’s geopolitical influence. Thoughts?
This NYT article distils five powerful threads but misses its own flawed assumption. Firstly, the five points:
- This isn’t over yet. It’s just the beginning
- Israel alone can’t stop Iran in Syria
- The US is focused elsewhere
- Russia can’t stay neutral for long
- Israeli jets aren’t invincible
As for the flawed assumption, perhaps it’s bias with the NYT editorial pen? But the headline assumes Israel as the aggressor, when the factual evidence is that Iran’s the aggressor, with it’s military build-up in Syria. Of the five takeaway points, the most important relates to Russia. If Russia wants to leverage her own enhanced position in the Middle East, surely it’s not in Russia’s interests for Iran through her proxies to threaten Israel?