How Syrian Opposition’s PR is Failing with US Government

 An article on Saturday from McClatchy News Service points to the extent of the disillusionment of the opposition Syrian National Coalition with Washington, amid continuing US delay in the provision of arms to the insurgency:

“The longer the international community takes to do something, the crisis and the extremism and the chaos on the ground intensifies,” said Mariam Jalabi, a spokeswoman for the visiting Syrian leaders. “We feel the international community pulling its hand out says, ‘You’re on your own.’”

The story — perhaps inadvertently — reveals a telling episode, not only in the Coalition’s fractious relationship with the Obama Administration but in the extent of its PR campaign.

While Coalition leaders, including its head Ahmad Asi al-Jarba, visited the United Nations in New York this week — including a chat between al-Jarba and US Secretary of State John Kerry — the head of the Supreme Military Command, Salem Idriss, did not come to the US.

US officials put out the message that they were unhappy with the commander, but the McClatchy story offers a different narrative: “Idriss, the U.S.-backed rebel leader who now refers snidely to his ‘American friends’, chose to skip the visit to New York, in large part because he predicted it would be a waste of time.”

Where did McClatchy get this information?

“He doesn’t feel like the Americans are as willing to fully support the opposition in ways that would make that trip worth it to him,” said Elizabeth O’Bagy, a researcher of Syrian rebel groups who’s in daily contact with Idriss and who does contract work on State Department programs for Syria.

 That paragraph is telling. O’Bagy, who has been at the Institute for the Study of War, has been one of the most incisive analysts of the military situation; however, the reference to “daily contact with Idriss” reveals — although McClatchy does not make clear — that she has taken on a different role in recent months as an activist and media spokesperson for the opposition.

 In January, O’Bagy joined the Syrian Emergency Task Force, a leading Washington-based outlet “created to support Syrians’ demand for freedom and democracy”.

The SETF has joined other organizations establish to lobby the US Administration for backing, notably the Syria Support Group.

The SSG has been promoted by high-profile US columnists, such as David Ignatius of the Washington Post — who also is one of the most vocal proponents of Idriss. That campaign has achieved success, such as the award of a US Government license “to legally raise funds and provide certain logistical, communications, and other services to the Free Syrian Army”.

Logistics and communications are not heavy weapons, however, which is why the current situation is increasingly one of friction and animosity, rather than co-operation.

 This spring, the State Department was vocal in pressing for US public intervention, notably against the opposition of the American military. However, McClatchy reported on Saturday:

 The Syrian Opposition Coalition’s internal bickering and repeated failures to cobble together a cohesive interim authority has cost it credibility in the State Department, which has been reluctant to give the group any direct funding from U.S. aid pots. While publicly cheering on a recent change of coalition leadership as a step toward breaking the political impasse, American officials are privately fed up with the perpetual infighting.

 Further evidence of the fallout — and the division within the Obama Administration — comes in a story from Reuters on Saturday, “Obama and Syria: a Trail of Half-Steps, Mixed Messages“.

 The article details an attempt in early 2012 within the Administration for American intervention:

 Led by a senior member of Obama’s National Security Council, the handful of Pentagon, State Department, and intelligence specialists came to a consensus: Obama should weigh military options to reinforce his vow that Assad must go.

 But with Obama determined to avoid U.S. military intervention, the idea found little traction inside the White House. And by mid-2012, the so-called “small group” — whose very existence was known to only a few within the government — was disbanded, former U.S. officials said.

 The story, despite the dramatic framing, is not new. AMid the debates within the Administration, officials leaked that both Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and CIA Director David Petraeus had pressed Obama to take more forceful steps.

 Instead, it is the timing that matters. The Reuters story appears to be built upon disillusioned American officials — both “current” and “former” — who are concluding that the President will never give the necessary public backing to the opposition and insurgency:

 In months of internal debate, he often spurned advice from senior advisers who proposed more robust action as the carnage in Syria intensified, leaving some frustrated.

 And that leads back to the Coalition and its US representative, Najib Ghadbian, declaring a possible end of its affair with Washington:

 The opposition leaders remain open to sitting down with American partners to find “creative” ways for the U.S. to do more without full-scale military intervention. But, he added, the opposition leadership already has decided to continue the fight against Assad –– “with or without the US”.

 “We always expect more from the U.S. and U.S. administration,” Ghadbian said. “But we have to go with each country’s willingness.”