[Marxism] Hezbollah: US Not in Favour of Destabilizing Syrian Gov’t
jncatron at gmail.com
Mon Nov 10 14:39:40 MST 2014
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 8:16 AM, Louis Proyect <lnp3 at panix.com> wrote:
Isn't the evidence overwhelming that American imperialism has no interest
> in "regime change" in Syria despite Obama telling Bob Schieffer yesterday
> that he would "like to see Assad go".
Public statements or claims one way or the other aside, their actual
behavior indicates that in Syria, like many (not all) countries of the
region, they're willing to cope with multiple outcomes.
At the moment, they're resigned to Assad because among the range of
outcomes acceptable to them (not ISIS or Nusra), he's winning.
If the tide were to somehow turn towards someone other than him (or ISIS or
Nusra), they'd roll with that, too,
Analyses that assume the US is a micromanaging global mother-in-law,
seeking to implement a wish list of ideal foreign governments, are all
pretty flawed, despite everyone seeming to have one these days.
The US has its interests, of course. But its grand strategy - a bit
confused at this point - is to arrange things in such a way that those
interests will be served regardless of who holds power overseas.
And yes, I think you're right that Obama has no interest in a Bush-style
"regime change" imposed wholly from the outside. He might have taken
advantage of existing trends, but they're no longer there.
"Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre, mod sceal þe mare, þe ure mægen
More information about the Marxism