© Sputnik/ Dmitriy Vinogradov
Russia set clear goals for its operation in Syria which helped it to avoid becoming entangled in a protracted quagmire characteristic of US foreign policy in the Middle East, Blako Franco wrote in National Interest on Sunday.
"The primary lesson seen in Syria was remarkably simple: clear and concise goals trump grandiose visions of regime change or nation building when intervening in conflicts," Franco wrote.
When the Russian operation in Syria began on September 30, it clearly and straightforwardly identified its goals: to help the Syrian government take back as much territory as possible from Daesh, Jabhat al-Nusra and other terrorist groups, and set a limited time-frame in which to do so.
"Clearly defining enemies ensured that allies were on the same page," and so Russian air strikes were able to work effectively with Syrian government forces, Franco wrote.
This clarity in Moscow's goals is in contrast with Washington's lack of clarity; "White House officials went from saying that Assad must go to more wishy washy language, and now have settled on stating that 'it is not clear' if Assad must go. If Washington's aims are to remove Assad and to defeat ISIS (Daesh), neither goal seems within reach any time soon."
"The United States is having trouble training and even identifying allies in Syria. In some cases, proclaimed partners are in outright conflict, such as the struggle between the Turks against the Syrian Kurds," Franco wrote.
"Before throwing weapons, money or bombs at new and old conflicts," Franco suggested the US learn some lessons from the Russian approach, and clearly plan its military operations and avoid becoming entrenched in quagmires like the Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts, where US military forces remain more than a decade after their invasion and regime change.
"The United States needs to sit down and ask: What are the goals and what is the time frame for intervention? Are US allies willing and able to support such moves? What are the parameters for withdrawal? Russia, perhaps due to limits on money and manpower, created realistic and short-term plans and executed them," Franco said.
I'm sure it is Russia who needs to learn from the US. How do they expect to support and grow their MIC with relatively short military missions with a clear goal? The absurdity of the article is that it grants to our politicians the assumption that they would like a short or limited war.
We (tptb) love protracted wars...more money for the wealthy, the politicians and the arms manufacturers. "The United States is having trouble training and even identifying allies." Tell me how the training could possibly go better. Billions spent on training and equipping only to have them turn tail and run leaving a veritable treasure trove of weapons and munitions for ISIS. Oh shuckie darn, now were going to have to replace all of that material and equipment at taxpayer expense.