All the Beirut news.

I don’t put much stock in stories of either a salafist emirate or a possible Alawite state headed by Assad. Neither is feasible or even sustainable. What I can tell is that regime and Hezbullah media outlets have been wildly optimistic about the regime’s chances of taking over the city, and of note is the “temperature” emerging from rebel sources near there. It is nowhere near as panicked and despaired as it was in the build up to the fall of Bab Amr in Homs last year.

I think if Qusayr falls then the regime can keep its grip on Homs, and that means that Damascus remains connected to the regime’s power base. If the rebels beat back the regime then Damascus risks being isolated, and for Hezbullah this could be a major propaganda blow to their image. There is also the advantage to either side of holding this territory “de facto” in the event of a political agreement.

QN – Forget about reality for a moment, what does Qusair contribute in the battle of narratives between the regime’s vs the revolution’s? http://www.opendemocracy.net/opensecurity/nadim-shehadi/revolution-or-civil-war-battle-of-narratives-in-syria

The elements are crucial – you have Sectarianism, Civil War, Fragmentation and Partition, Al-Qaeda, JAN, Spillover, Chaos etc… ; in addition the run up to the battle saw Nasrallah threatening Israel and declaring the Jawlan as a battlefield while openly announcing his participation in the battle; all of which are elements that re-enforce the pro-regime narrative. You also have overt and active support to the regime from Russia, Iran and Hizballah while the lack of real support to the opposition is even more flagrant. If the battle of Qusair also serves as a diversion from the battle of Damascus, a trap to exhaust the rebels without the need for a victory on either side, then the benefits become even more apparent. Qusair is not really as ‘strategically’ important a location as most analysts claim, but the battle may be so.

QN,

Let’s say Assad gets his mini state, a Damascus-Homs corridor + the coastal region. What exactly are the Iranians gaining from that except a big headache? Without the oil, that state is bankrupt from day one let alone the sanctions and the fact that the rich Sunnis for the most part are not going to stay and live there. It is going to be a huge burden for Iran with no clear benefit. That state is going to be fighting Sunni Arabs, not Israel. No, what the Iranians and Assad are playing for is what Alex wants. They want a negotiated solution in which they get something like the French model, a president responsible for foreign affairs and the army, and a PM and government responsible for internal matters. The president of course they envision is Assad. That way they keep Syria intact and maintain its “resistance” foreign policy. If the West agrees to this, they also get rid of the sanctions and Syrian isolation.

What they are doing is trying to bolster their negotiating position in order to achieve this goal. They are hoping that just like the West and the Gulf Arabs finally got fed up with the Lebanese civil war and allowed Hafez to take over Lebanon, the same will happen with Syria. They think that the West will cave in as it sees the casualties and refugees mount and accept their position.

Why is Hezbollah fighting in Qusayr then? To prove to the West that Iran and its proxies are 100% behind Assad and that they can make the war drag on forever. Qusayr is a good place for Hezbollah to fight since their supply lines are very short and secure.

Naturally, the “resistance” is miscalculating badly and using the wrong model. The way the US is going to approach this is the same way it approached the Iran-Iraq war. As Kerry said, any Assad gain is going to be “temporary” because the US will provide the rebels, directly or indirectly with weapons to even things out, but of course not enough weapons to win. After all, what is wrong with making Iran, Hezbollah, Assad and the Islamists bleed for a decade or so? Except of course that it is at the expense of the Syrian people but unfortunately like the Iranians and Iraqis in the Iran-Iraq war, they don’t count for very much.

So basically both sides are playing chicken but with the Syrian people suffering if no one gives. Assad is going to lose this game of chicken because his support base is also bleeding and quite badly as the war goes on and there are strong Western and Arab interests to curb Iranian influence. Dealing with ruthless assholes is always a pain and the Assads are as ruthless as they come.

Helena, that was my point (not about Dexter, but rather the Washington official.)

David, the Akhbar report is not an impressionistic musing, but rather one of the secondary narratives that I (the distant observer) am trying to triangulate with. And yes, I agree with you about everything else you said.

I suppose the question remains: what is actually happening in al-Qusayr? This is not an impulse buy for Hizbullah. This has to be the result of very careful calculations or else very heavy pressure from Iran. Is Qusayr so valuable a staging ground or weapons trafficking node for the opposition that HA would risk dozens of fighters for it? Is the regime trying to ethnically cleanse the road to the sea?

I don’t know the answer to these questions. And that annoys me.

The battle for Syria will still be going on 5-10 years from now. Remember, you heard it here!

i’m only a dog, but, as implied by Kenner, why can’t it be both?

Ya Elias, that Akhbar article is a problematic one to use to condemn the “impressionistic musings” of distant observers over firsthand reporting — it says it is a dispatch from Qusayr. In any case, I found it analytically useful, as it is obviously an account hostile to the opposition that nevertheless reports the Qusayr battle could take another week. That’s in stark contrast to some of the early regime propaganda about what was taking place.

There’s a broader discussion to be had on the merits of firsthand reporting vs. bloggers, tweeters, and others who rely on Web-based sources. Obviously, when gathering information, it’s foolish to turn this into an either-or equation. Journalists on the ground can be hampered by deeply skewed perspectives, and mere tweeters can turn out to have nuanced and informed views about what is going on in the world. So it goes.

And if you think that either Dexter Filkins or the US officials whom he quotes here have any clue what is happening in Qusayr or elsewhere in Syria, then I have a fine piece of beach-front property in New Jersey I’d like to sell you… C’meon, Qifa! These officials are the same people who assured us with great confidence back in 2011 that the Asad regime wouldn’t last till 2012; and then in 2012 assured it wouldn’t last till 2013; etc…

Reblogged this on YALLA SOURIYA.

Great analysis everyone. I am more Brad V that Nadeem but not buy much. Anyway, what can be done to resolve this conundrum? Federation a la Switzerland, friendly spin off like Tcheckoslovakia or a break up like Yugolsavia. The current state of affairs is unsustainable.
Also, how are we defining failed state? To me it is a state where governance is impossible. we are pretty close wouldn’t you say?

Under Nasser, Sadat, and Mubarak, the legal class would suffer one debilitating blow after another, setting the stage for the current crisis facing Egypt today, which, as Amr pointed out in his talk, has major legal valences.

QN,

You mean it wasn’t Israel’s fault. This isn’t going to sit well with Lala.

I think the only super woman that has had the courage to bring forwards her humanity is Christiane Amanpour. I bless her.

Let’s be straightforward that no woman has been able to bring forwards any solutions to the plagues we have been discussing on this blog to find a way forwards for humanity for some time.