Mark Osborn replies to Pham Binh’s polemic against the AWL position on Syria.
We print US socialist Pham Binh’s criticism of the AWL’s analysis and attitude on Syria.
The carnage in Syria continues with the regime unable to crush the rebels, and the rebels — despite making gains — unable to overrun the regime’s heartlands.
Tom Unterrainer (Solidarity 274, 13 February) thinks that there is a problem with the AWL National Committee’s recent resolution on Syria.
In responding to my criticism of the resolution passed on Syria at the AWL National Committee on 5 January this year, Colin Foster seizes on one minor aspect of my argument to teach us all a lesson about the tricky business of formulating adequate political slogans.
I find it difficult to agree with Martin Thomas’ statement in Solidarity 272 (30 January): “Better troops out now than an African Afghanistan.”
In the closing weeks of 2012 residents of Bostan al-Qasr, a neighborhood in the Syrian city of Aleppo, were attacked by fighters from the Islamist Jubhat al-Nusra faction of the opposition.
On 2 January the United Nations reported that the war between the Assad dictatorship and opposition groups in Syria has cost a minimum of 60,000 lives since March 2011.
The fight against Bashar Assad’s one-party Baath state, which began in March 2011 and which had seemed locked in a bloody stalemate, may be tilting in the opposition’s favour.
The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights report at least 40,000 people have died, including 28,000 civilians, since the start of the uprising against the one-party Baath dictatorship, which began in March 2012.