Looks like David Ignatius, augur of the conventional Washington wisdom, has come around to the point I made three years ago. From his recent Washington Post column:
Russian-American cooperation on Syria faces a huge obstacle right now. It would legitimize a Russian regime that invaded Ukraine and meddled in U.S. and European elections, in addition to its intervention in Syria. Putin’s very name is toxic in Congress and the U.S. media these days, and Trump is blasted for even considering compromise.
Against these negatives, there’s only one positive argument: Working with Russia may be the only way to reduce the level of violence in Syria and to create a foundation for a calmer, more decentralized nation that can eventually recover from its tragic war.
It might also give Washington a seat at the table in discussing Syria’s future, something it won’t have under present circumstances.
Being able to change course and take a new stance more cooperative with the Syrian government depends on the hierarchy of values. As long as regime change in Syria and poking a stick in Russia’s collective eye are more important than Syrian lives, it’s out of the question.
You can’t make an omelet without breaking eggs. Syrian eggs, of course. Okay, Washington, where’s the omelet?
