Brzezinski: Syria Intervention Will Only Make it Worse

Writing at Time magazine in response to an article by John McCain advocating US intervention in Syria, Zbigniew Brzezinski – not exactly a peacenik – argues that “the Syrian conflict is a sectarian war in a volatile region whose potential to spread and directly threaten American interests would only be increased by U.S. intervention.”

Brzezinski_ZbigniewThe struggle is between forces funded and armed by outside sponsors, notably Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Iran. Also participating are foreign religious groups not directly controlled by the sponsors, namely the Sunni Salafists and Iranian-aligned militias, not to mention intensely anti-Western al-Qaeda fighters. American involvement would simply mobilize the most extreme elements of these factions against the U.S. and pose the danger that the conflict would spill over into the neighborhood and set Jordan, Iraq and Lebanon on fire.

…Broader regional fighting could bring the U.S. and Iran into direct conflict, a potentially major military undertaking for the U.S. A U.S.-Iran confrontation linked to the Syrian crisis could spread the area of conflict even to Afghanistan. Russia would benefit from America’s being bogged down again in the Middle East. China would resent U.S. destabilization of the region because Beijing needs stable access to energy from the Middle East.

…The various schemes that have been proposed for a kind of tiddlywinks intervention from around the edges of the conflict—no-fly zones, bombing Damascus and so forth—would simply make the situation worse. None of the proposals would result in an outcome strategically beneficial for the U.S. On the contrary, they would produce a more complex, undefined slide into the worst-case scenario…

Leaving aside the media, which barely knows how to respond to foreign conflicts except to rally U.S. intervention, there exists only a small minority in Washington that advocates taking further action in Syria. Namely, the McCain-Graham faction and the part of the Republican party that follows their lead. Establishment voices in Washington, like the Obama administration, the Defense Department, the Aaron David Miller‘s and Zbigniew Brzezinski’s, are largely against it.

That’s how obviously stupid a U.S. war in Syria would be: even Beltway analysts know it.

25 thoughts on “Brzezinski: Syria Intervention Will Only Make it Worse”

  1. sigh… No, they don't.

    Obama is fully on board – he just doesn't want to be blamed for doing it prematurely or in a manner that reflects on his undeserved Nobel Peace Prize. But he absolutely is doing NOTHING to prevent the Syrian crisis from getting worse. If he were REALLY intent on solving the crisis, he would have lit a fire under Saudi Arabia and Qatar and he would NOT have put UN Charter Chapter 7 language in EVERY resolution the US submitted to the UNSC last year.

  2. It amazing how the borders drawn on maps seem to incite the mind to compartimentalize reality into easily containable "problem areas" amenable to "solutions". Take a map where the borders are NOT drawn and just the topography is shown. Then think again.

  3. I hope Brzezinski does NOT get involve about politics especailly middle east Iran. Brzemzinski was the man in 1979 during Carter administration he stood by Khomeni, and changed Iran to Islmic terrorist regime , and now the whole world have to work so hard to change this dangerous, brutual terrorist regime. Mr. Brzenzinski Please DO NOT RECOMMEND your wrong policy any more because you got no brain. You have destroyed Iranians for ever. You planned to change the entire middle east to Islamic regime, since Carter lost you didn't have time to do it. Are you American or Russian?

    1. He's Polish, is he not?

      The man is a war criminal who helped wreck Afghanistan.

    2. Wrong cher, it was the United States, specifically the Eisenhower administration that had the top 300 people in the democratically elected government in Iran slaughtered by the CIA in 1953. How selectively ignorant you are to the facts.

  4. Glaser…

    Not only is the US already "intervening" in Syria, the US is already 'at War with' Syria—in the fullest sense of term "at war with". I'm not entirely sure why many now seem to conflate the term "intervention" with an all-out "invasion" and/or "occupation" via US military personnel.

    This inane so-called "debate" floating around the lame-stream is a so-called "debate" among pundits over US "tactics"–i.e. 'how' (methods) to carry out and continue on with current war on Syria; not "US strategy"–i.e. whether to go to war with Syria in the first place…

    "Assad must go", remember? The current Syrian state must fall and be rebuilt by the US State Department in our (the US') image—so-called 'democracy spreading'. Although absurd and illogical, this (along with nuanced, but insignificant, variations) seems to be the generally accepted lame-stream implied premise. This premise even seems to be accepted by many here at AW.C. Well guess what: this simply cannot happen, not even on a theoretical level, without 'war'.

    So to clarify: what's happening in Syria now would not be possible/sustainable without the US’ continued and significant: political, financial, and military support for the insurgents inside Syria. This, in addition to the US' intensive ‘diplomatic efforts' on the geopolitical level: 'leading', 'coordinating', and holding together the unholy alliance of nations involved in attacking Syria. It’s important to keep in mind the US has also "officially recognized” a sham group of stooges, anointing them: "The Legitimate Representatives of the Aspirations of the Syrian People"—a group which primarily consists of exiles, put together by the US I might add, currently based in Cairo, Egypt and/or Istanbul, Turkey in-between luxury resort stays in Qatar and Saudi Arabia where they demand more money and 'no-fly zones'.

  5. Also…it's worth evaluating the current 'status' of the 'situation' logically.

    For example: just last week Israel 'directly' attacked a Damascus Suburb with Israeli Airforce (IAF) "heavy weapons" for the second, and third, time this year (2013). In case you don't already know: Israel is considered the US' "closest ally in the region" by President Obama himself. Interestingly, Israel is the only major player in this proxy war that has not 'officially' taken a 'position' (which is part of the charade) on the Syrian 'conflict'…Israel has not “officially” taken ‘position’ on Syria, even though Israel has already "directly" attacked Syrian military complexes located in the Syrian Capital’s suburbs 3 times this year with the IAF. In fact, and adding another ‘piece to the puzzle’, US 'officials' were the first, and only, ones to publicly 'leak' the "news" of the first IAF strike last week—the strike which allegedly occurred sometime last Thursday or Friday—the US 'leaked' this "info" before any Israeli or Syrian 'officials' even commented on it (“officially”, or otherwise), much less acknowledged it actually occurred in the first place (which is still somewhat unclear)… President Obama himself personally lauded the 'covert' Israeli air strikes on the Syrian Capital via a "special" 'one-on-one' lame-stream interview shortly after Israel's second strike on Sunday.

    So, Glaser, you’re claiming the US is currently “not” ‘at war with’ Syria…really?

    Anyway…Brzezinski’s an idiot. This isn't the 1970s, and it's certainly not the US of the 1970s from a domestic and geo-political standpoint. US "tiddlywinks intervention", as Brzezinski puts it, is exactly what's currently underway and being employed as US policy on Syria. Things certainly can 'escalate’, quickly, of course. Even so, Obama's not currently 'holding back' for the "officially" stated reasons. If Obama sees even the slightest opportunity, US ballistic missiles will be firing into Syria faster than the Administration can type up Jay Carney’s BS talking points ‘explaining’ the attack…

  6. Glaser kisses Brzezinski's political statue.

    Big Zbig is no nothing about ME regionalism. This is not a sectarian war -that's what Brzezinski created. His model in Afghanistan, the replications in Central America (yes he was there too) his son in SE Europe under Clinton. This guys thrive on turning fights into "sectarianism" that's their bread and butter. just because al qaida shows up to the fight or that the US gets Sauds and Qatar to directly fund the war doesn't mean the regional disagreements inside Syria was sectarian. It's remarkable, by the way. for Bigh Zbig to pander this crap about KSA equatable to being a sectarian fight we should get into because they shill didn't have a problem with the KSA matching the US dollar for dollar in Afghanistan.

    and he continues to the larger canard that the US isn't involved. What a shill. Ford was on the ground day one putting signage and how-to lit into dissenting voices…Hillary Clinton Obama were day one calling for the ouster of Assad. day one. And to this day the US gives international political legitimacy to the so-called rebels…

    of course, Brzezinski doesn't want the US to enter into Syria –it would go against the larger design of the plan. Brzezinski never wants us to directly fight. HE wants the US to be in the shadows, behind the curtain, in the closet…not risking defeat even when their policy makers get it wrong every time. Obama directly engaging Syria would be the biggest military loss the US has seen in a long time not just because of regional instability but because of the number of dead "allies"…but live it up to the US to drum up faux opposition and hope to have others kill and die for its gain…yep. that's not "peacenik" that's just scandalous and unethical pigs

  7. Don't ever listen to anything that moron Brzezinski has to say. This is the same person who helped create Al qaeda by inflaming the passions ( as if they really needed that ) of islamic militants in Afghanistan by sending them into battle against the Soviets with his famous battle cry that "God is on your side". I wonder whose side is God on now – in Afghanistan – and which God are we talking about exactly? Don't ever listen to anything that degenerate has to say.

  8. Thank you for your article.
    I wonder why you did not mention two players in Syria conflict, mainly Turkey and (to some extent) Israel, when you said "The struggle is between forces funded and armed by outside sponsors, notably Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Iran".

  9. The idea of Syrian regime change is from Hillary Clinton which makes the USA being involved since day one and no matter the present USA government saying or supplying who and by whom.., USA is giving money and other "humanitarian" equipments for these rebels.., as they called.., to change the Syrian regime which is not desirable by USA and some Europeans countries.., so the wording "getting involved" have no relation with "being involved" already.., at the same time.., the Syrian war is not a sectarian war.., is a proxy war.., is a war where Brzezinski needs to know.., unless he just want to have said something to show his concern about all that wars involving USA but getting no where.

  10. Wow!

    I Recant! I Recant!

    If Zbigniew Brzezinski is saying this it must be really bad and the dangers of fundamentalist Jihadists getting control of a major Arab country enormous.

    He was the one in the famous interview ten years ago who said "No, it was a real smart idea, there is no danger as the Arabs can never agree, all it will do is leave some stirred up Arabs".

  11. This man was/is the lackey/minion of David Rockefeller in creating and LEADING the Trilateral Commission…to promote One World Government(Zbigs book Between Two Ages calls for it) through cooperation and international entangling alliances and financial cooption of sovereignty of nations….BIPARTISANLY…

    This man is to be "believed" when his advocacy of globalism and socialism are emitted in his Polish accent….

    Anything else is One World Globalony and intrinsically evil.

  12. The article doesn't state that Brzezinski has nonetheless called for Assad's removal, so it is all a non-starter on the Syrian side. The irony of course is that Assad did begin a constitutional reform and democratization process in 2011 which the Syrian people overwhelmingly endorsed in Feb, 2012, so if the Administration and Brzezinski are talking about "democracy" and "human rights", they would be excluding someone who would probably win hands down, and who has conducted himself as a more pragmatic and durable leader and statesman than anything the West can offer. Any election should take place within the parameters set by the Syrian people, and if they re-elect Assad so be it.

  13. Assad is a murderous tyrant who would kill 1 million Syrians to stay in power. He's already killed close to 100,000 Syrians. It's really sad that in all this everyone has forgotten the most important thing, the Syrian people. Remember those people? The ones who wanted freedom, human rights, dignity, and democracy? Its more sad that the only people who appear to be on their side are the jihadists, who are really there for their own reasons. So congrats to Assad for shaping a popular revolution into a sectarian war. Congrats to the jihadist for exploiting the situation and being the only alternative, and congrats to us for letting all this unfold.

  14. Not that I believe in David Icke's shape-shifting reptilians, but if I stare at that photo of Brzezinski long enough, I almost see the lizard-like features come into focus.

  15. Its the opposite of what many comments are saying:
    All pro Assad demonstrations were done by families of military personal and were done during wk-days and during working hours – gov. employees were supposed to participate – and if they did not appear; there will be deduction of their salary at the end of the month! Very few people participated in election who were of Assad's clan and sect! Pro-opposition demonstrations were voluntary & peaceful every night and on wk-ends! When world lenaders including Medvedev criticized Assad – Assad STARTED CREATING FACTS – He released Abu Musab Al Suri from jail "search his ideology in the INTERNET" in the 2nd half Dec. 2011 – And car bombings started early Jan. 2012 and the first group who claimed responsibility was JABHAT-ALNUSRA – Abu Musab Al Suri as any prisoner released from Syrian jail must sign an agreement with the mukhabarat – Abu Musab Al Suri is something totally different style from Bin Ladin though he had worked with him – NOT A SINGLE ARAB OR NON-ARAB JOURNALIST had or has mentioned his whereabouts or his doings

  16. Thank you for your article.
    I wonder why you did not mention two players in Syria conflict, mainly Turkey and (to some extent) Israel, when you said "The struggle is between forces funded and armed by outside sponsors, notably Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Iran".

Comments are closed.