Politics & Policy

Jimmy Carter Endorses Putin’s Scheme for Syria

Bashar al-Assad with Vladimir Putin in Moscow, October 20, 2015. (Alexey Druzhinin/AFP/Getty)
His vision for a multilateral peace agreement has many problems.

Although unsuccessful, Operation Eagle Claw — the April 1980 effort to rescue U.S. Embassy staff from Tehran — was immensely courageous. Eight Americans gave their lives in that mission. But President Carter also showed great courage in ordering the highly complex operation to recover the hostages, seize an Iranian military airfield, and then escape. Eagle Claw was certainly far more dangerous than the bin Laden raid. Still, like President Obama’s decision in May 2011, Carter’s decision in 1980 was the right one at the time.

Unfortunately, Mr. Carter’s latest gambit in the Middle East is less impressive. It is summed up in his latest New York Times op-ed, “A Five-Nation Plan to End the Syrian Crisis,” a proposal that abandons the tough-minded realism Carter showed in Eagle Claw and in forging a lasting peace between Israel and Egypt.

Mr. Carter’s Syria peace plan begins with an odd homage to the Assad family. Noting his own longtime links with Syria’s dictator, Bashar al-Assad, and Bashar’s father/predecessor, Hafez al-Assad, Mr. Carter says he is uniquely placed to advise the U.S. government. He then argues that before its current civil war, “Syria set a good example of harmonious relations among its many different ethnic and religious groups.” Speaking of a “good example,” Mr. Carter apparently includes Hafez al-Assad’s massacre of tens of thousands of Sunni Muslims at Hama in 1982.*

Mr. Carter is endorsing Russia’s plan to force the West to support Assad by leaving IS and the dictator as the only Syrian actors left standing.

Next, Mr. Carter rules that calling on Assad to relinquish power has always been delusional: “Those who knew [Assad] saw this as a fruitless demand, but it has been maintained for more than four years.” Here, Mr. Carter ignores the many analysts who have used, to borrow a term Carter employs, “data-driven research” to argue convincingly that greater support for the Free Syrian Army back in 2012 might have brought Assad’s collapse. Mr. Carter continues: “In May 2015 a group of global leaders known as ‘the Elders’ visited Moscow.” On this visit, he notes, the elders (a humanitarian group) learned that Russia’s position on Syria is actually quite reasonable. And so, with Mr. Putin’s “approval,” Mr. Carter tells us he presented Russia’s peace plan to the Obama administration (who to their credit, appear to have ignored it).

RELATED: How the U.S. Should Respond to the Russian Offensive in Syria

Regardless, via Mr. Carter’s evident confidence in Mr. Putin, we learn that even now — in late October 2015 — after Mr. Putin has shredded eastern European security, downed European passenger planes, helped massacre Syria’s people, and allied himself with an expansionist China — Mr. Carter still believes in the myth of the “reset.” And this trust informs Mr. Carter’s amenability to Mr. Putin’s premise for the Syrian peace process. It is here that the central problem with Mr. Carter’s proposal becomes evident. Stating that Russia’s bombing of Syria “may increase the flow of refugees to Europe” (and the pope may be a Catholic), Mr. Carter then argues that Russia’s offensive “has helped clarify the choice between” Assad and the Islamic State (IS). This is utterly ridiculous: Mr. Carter is endorsing Russia’s plan to force the West to support Assad by leaving IS and the dictator as the only Syrian actors left standing. But Mr. Carter isn’t finished. He praises Iran’s proposal for a Syrian cease-fire and asserts that “some mechanism could be found to implement [Iran’s peace proposals].”

#share#There are many holes in this theory. First, Russia’s proposal would push moderate Syrian rebels into the arms of IS as they came to see IS as the only means of resisting Assad. Similarly, Iran’s proposal would turn Syrian politics into a far worse replicate of Lebanese politics. That’s because any ceasefire — absent immediate reforms — would simply be used by the Assad axis (Assad, Iran, Russia, and the Lebanese Hezbollah) to rebuild its military power and then assassinate its political opponents. Don’t believe me? Ask the families of two citizens of Lebanon, Rafic Hariri and Wissam al-Hassan, who were murdered for standing up to the Assad-axis dominion. It defies belief to assume Mr. Assad would cede power after renewing his power.

That said, Lebanon can provide a useful example of a possible alternative strategy to Mr. Carter’s: confronting Assad, as in Lebanon during the 2005 Cedar Revolution. During that crisis, President Bush aligned U.S. regional and European allies behind the Lebanese people and helped force Mr. Assad to yield.

#related#Of course, critiquing Mr. Carter’s plan is not to say that we should simply ignore Russian interests in Syria. Mr. Putin, for example, will never accept a peace deal that restricts his access to the Mediterranean Sea by closing Russian bases at Tartus and Latakia. On the contrary, I’ve argued that President Putin should be assured that he can retain access to Syria post-Assad. This is realism. Yet Mr. Carter’s proposal is the opposite of realism. It would surrender U.S. influence to Putin, and Syria’s people to Assad and the Islamic State. Moreover, it rests on a central absurdity: The notion that the Assad axis would, for some inexplicable reason, compromise from a position of strength.

On this issue, Mr. Carter is a good man with a bad plan.

* Incidentally, the people of Hama are again under attack today from Assad and Russian and Iranian allies.

Tom Rogan is a columnist for National Review Online, a contributor to the Washington Examiner, and a former panelist on The McLaughlin Group. Email him at TRogan@McLaughlin.com

Most Popular

Politics & Policy

The Problem with Certainty

EDITOR’S NOTE: The following is Jonah Goldberg’s weekly “news”letter, the G-File. Subscribe here to get the G-File delivered to your inbox on Fridays. Dear Reader (Including those of you having this read to you while you white-knuckle the steering wheel trying to get to wherever you’re going for the ... Read More
Politics & Policy

The Worst Cover-Up of All Time

President Donald Trump may be guilty of many things, but a cover-up in the Mueller probe isn’t one of them. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, attempting to appease forces in the Democratic party eager for impeachment, is accusing him of one, with all the familiar Watergate connotations. The charge is strange, ... Read More

Theresa May: A Political Obituary

On Friday, Theresa May, perhaps the worst Conservative prime minister in recent history, announced her resignation outside of number 10 Downing Street. She will step down effective June 7. “I have done my best,” she insisted. “I have done everything I can. . . . I believe it was right to persevere even ... Read More
PC Culture

TV Before PC

Affixing one’s glance to the rear-view mirror is usually as ill-advised as staring at one’s own reflection. Still, what a delight it was on Wednesday to see a fresh rendition of “Those Were the Days,” from All in the Family, a show I haven’t watched for nearly 40 years. This time it was Woody Harrelson ... Read More
Politics & Policy

The Democrats’ Other Class War

There is a class war going on inside the Democratic party. Consider these two cris de couer: Writing in the New York Times under the headline “America’s Cities Are Unlivable — Blame Wealthy Liberals,” Farhad Manjoo argues that rich progressives have, through their political domination of cities such as ... Read More

The Deepfake of Nancy Pelosi

You’ve almost made it to a three-day weekend! Making the click-through worthwhile: A quick note about how National Review needs your help, concerns about “deepfakes” of Nancy Pelosi, one of the most cringe-inducing radio interviews of all time, some news about where to find me and the book in the near ... Read More
White House

For Democrats, the Party’s Over

If the Democrats are really tempted by impeachment, bring it on. Since the day after the 2016 election they have been threatening this, placing their chips on the Russian-collusion fantasy and then on the phantasmagoric charade of obstruction of justice. The attorney general accurately gave the ingredients of the ... Read More

America’s Best Defense Against Socialism

The United States of America has flummoxed socialists since the nineteenth century. Marx himself couldn’t quite understand why the most advanced economy in the world stubbornly refused to transition to socialism. Marxist theory predicts the immiseration of the proletariat and subsequent revolution from below. ... Read More