Just goes to show that the word "expert" is used far to loosely. And how bad things are when members of the US Congress are running our foreign affairs.

I do not remember a case when a person, even if it is the leader of a country, has been able to replace the political system. I would look to the people around the leader and managers that influence his outlook.

He can still take decisions. He could still be responsible for opening up the country. Nevertheless, he must be confined to the framework of political system that he has inherited.

By the way, I think that the essay "Where do bad ideas come from" apply to Syria with much greater accuracy.

Can anyone name a dictator who took power after his father's death and implemented real reforms?

I'm hoping that my next pizza helps me lose weight...

misrepresentation of what Clinton said as the springboard for the piece.

Clinton did no call Assad a reformer. She was responding to a question on whether our armed forces would intervene in Syria. She cited the lack of support in several quarters, including Congress - and this quote was part of that answer.

Let me echo coffie - Bashar was tapped to lead by the combine assembled by his father, probably as the candidate able to provide continuity with the least level of fighting over the succession. For a couple of years his power was a real question; eventually he moved to gather more of the power into his own hands. Hopes that he would use his enhanced position to begin reforms waned with time.

Times change, however. Syria did negotiate on Israel through back doors, and it seems that the UN commission investigating the assassination of Hariri may place primary blame on Hezbollah, not Syria. Kerry presumably has some reason for maintaining hope over the years.

I think that we don't know yet whether or not Bashir will turn reformer. When pressure on the regime begins to rise enough to create rifts among its constituent groups and open up the possibilities for independent action, we will find out.

I am amazed at how americans have short memories and thier power of analysis of events seem to ignore facts on the ground.

Although Assad needs to move faster on reforms, we need to remember that the US and its allies did not exactly help the situation.

The Iraq war which sent over a million refugess into Syrai practically crippled the economy and introduced security issues like no other event. This along with a belligerent US policy against Syria and making noises that they are next, doesn't exactly open doors to reforms. Let's not forget the constant support the US gives to Israel when it comes to the occupation of the Golan, the invasion of Lebanon, the smearing of the Syrian with the Hariri death and the constant obstacle the AIPAC lobby put in place to stop any contacts with the syrians that might elevate their message to the policy makers. Pelosi received a tongue lashing from the lobbyists when she visited Syria. Kerry is constantly accused of ignoring Syria's so called terror status, which by the way was used by Bush to discredit the country that refused to support his genocide in Iraq.

Syria jumped on the band wagon when the 1st Bush formed a coalition to throw Saddam from Kuwait, and opened its intelligence files to the CIA after 911. The CIA made it well known they were very happy with the cooperation they received from the Syrians. Of course none of this paid back. On the contrary, the americans implemented more sanctions and blocked any attempt to allow Assad's government to improve its economy.

After years of american sanctions, constant attempts to isolate and discredit Assad and his Govt., dumping over a million refugees on his doorstep, lying about his involvement in teh hariri assasination, blocking any economic initiative that would have helped the Syrians improve their status, now we complain he is not a reformer.

Let's remember with the attacks of 911, the americans were happy as hell to give up their civil liberties and spend billions to get peace of mind that they are protected. Somehow talks of justice and civil liberties became anti american and many people were chastised by the media and in some cases even imprisoned for even suggesting that the Govt is crossing the line. Good for us, but not good for the Syrians?

Had the americans been more supportive or even handed in their dealings with Syria and its Govt., had they been more fair and willing to support international law regarding the Golan occupation, had they pushed Israel to be more open to negotiation, who knows, by removing these obstacles, Assad might have had room to reform. Iran would be isolated, Hizballah would not exist and Syria might have become an ally.

Short memory.

Power to Whom?
Nice article.
Pdf to epub conversion