You seem to be arguing against a position I don’t hold. Neither the US not Russia nor their respective proxies have the type of democracy and local resiliency I’m advocating for. Deconstructing and perhaps, yes, even Balkanizing these imperial powers would be a step forward, though I think it will be best if this is done internally rather than by external powers. This too easily slides into factional conflict and imperialism rather than the far more winnable and liberatory conflict of people vs the elites.
Syria was a very complex situation but the best outcome I think would have been the success of the early revolutionary movement before it devolved into civil war. Perhaps there is a chance this can be revived if the new government is less repressive than Assad but I’m not too optimistic. Unfortunately, people there are tired of war and may choose the easiest path of hoping that the new government will treat people well without a need for organized resistance. But I do not think this is likely as it is the nature of states to consolidate power, and Syrian institutions that could resist this consolidation are currently weak. Once this consolidation is completed a new regime will be born and it will do as it pleases domestically just as all states that lack accountability to the people do.
Balkanizing these imperial powers would be a step forward, though I think it will be best if this is done internally rather than by external powers. This too easily slides into factional conflict and imperialism rather than the far more winnable and liberatory conflict of people vs the elites.
It is a nice sentiment, but Assad government, nevermind US government, has enough power to suppress organic wishes for liberalization, and Assad rulership had a lot of liberal pluses, despite not being pro Israel/US enough for US to tolerate his rule. There were no easy solutions to famine/drought.
You seem to be arguing against a position I don’t hold. Neither the US not Russia nor their respective proxies have the type of democracy and local resiliency I’m advocating for. Deconstructing and perhaps, yes, even Balkanizing these imperial powers would be a step forward, though I think it will be best if this is done internally rather than by external powers. This too easily slides into factional conflict and imperialism rather than the far more winnable and liberatory conflict of people vs the elites.
Syria was a very complex situation but the best outcome I think would have been the success of the early revolutionary movement before it devolved into civil war. Perhaps there is a chance this can be revived if the new government is less repressive than Assad but I’m not too optimistic. Unfortunately, people there are tired of war and may choose the easiest path of hoping that the new government will treat people well without a need for organized resistance. But I do not think this is likely as it is the nature of states to consolidate power, and Syrian institutions that could resist this consolidation are currently weak. Once this consolidation is completed a new regime will be born and it will do as it pleases domestically just as all states that lack accountability to the people do.
It is a nice sentiment, but Assad government, nevermind US government, has enough power to suppress organic wishes for liberalization, and Assad rulership had a lot of liberal pluses, despite not being pro Israel/US enough for US to tolerate his rule. There were no easy solutions to famine/drought.
Your 2nd paragraph is spot on.