The Baath regime of Bashar al-Assad spent the final day of a supposed 4-day cease-fire on Monday intensively bombing its own cities, with fighter jets flying dozens of sorties against rebel positions. Some bombs were so powerful that they kicked up mini mushroom clouds. Neighborhoods of the capital, Damascus, were bombed, as were rebellious cities such as Maaret al-Nu`man, parts of which were said by activists to have been flattened. Revolutionaries are trying to use Maaret al-Nu`man as a base from which to take the regime’s nearby military base.
The bombings killed some 76 persons
For their part, revolutionary groups set off two big bombs in the Rawdah district in the outskirts of the capital, leaving 11 dead.
The argument of dissidents that the bombing campaign is a sign of weakness is persuasive. Bombing from a height is inaccurate and likely to kill innocent non-combatants, and so will likely turn even more people against the regime. But we can surmise from it that the regime’s infantry and armor are unable to restore control over much of the country.
bombing your own citizens??
Syrian infantry don’t have the body armour and secure wireless communications enjoyed by troops from richer countries. Syrian tanks are mostly obsolescent. Even those upgraded with reactive armour are vulnerable to most RPG’s.
It is logical, then, that Syrian forces would not engage in close urban combat unless a particular objective was important enough to justify the casualties they would suffer.
Western militaries usually employ the euphemism, “force protection,” to describe such tactics.
Perhaps NATO should donate to Assad’s army a few thousand kits of Type IV body armour, in order to reduce civilian suffering?
So really, professor, when you think about it, you can’t really blame Assad for bombing the civilian areas of cities.
Al-Jazeera, the “project” of the Sheikhs of Qatar is probably not the most unbiased and credible reporting entity particularly on a proxy war being actively funded by the same Qatari Sheikhs.
My flatmate watches them in Arabic all day. He tells me that give ample coverage to rebel atrocities. This makes them more unbiased and credible than most Western news organisations. Most of the success of the station is due to it building a diverse audience by heightening controversy, and they haven’t abandoned this formula.
Every day, they have blistering arguments by pro- and anti-Assad speakers. Again, this makes them more unbiased and credible than the Western media. And the Russian media as well, which prefers to whitewash Assad (from what little I know – if other readers know otherwise, please say).
I don’t know, Sigil. At least here the US, the media seems pretty good at ignoring Syria completely. That’s unbiased, is a sense.
Some of Assad’s Western fans pose as unbiased, but their comments always find fault with anything that reflects badly on Assad. They focus on crimes committed by the opposition, and keep quiet about the much larger number of crimes committed by the regime. These closet Baathists spend their time critiquing Human Rights Watch, Al Jazerra, and various journalists. They make equivalencies between Saudi Arabia and Assad’s regime, apparently oblivios to the fact that Assad has killed tens of thousands of his countrymen.
Without giving credit to Assad in any way, I wonder what control he actually has over the ferocious war his armed forces are waging. Could he put a stop to it if he wanted to?
Does the Arab Spring have a faint resemblance to post Tito Yugoslavia?
Interesting.
Remember that Mubarak lost control of his military, but they went in the other direction.
I’ve read that in addition to the aircraft bombardment that there is heavy use of artillery and tanks.
If that is true, it looks like an all out push against the rebels.
The next step would be to sent in infantry.