There's a pretty simple rule to follow on the credibility of Syria analysts. The key factor being whether or not they believe that Idlib survives because of US policy in the region, rather than in spite of it.
The international community stood aside as submit or starve sieges & indiscriminate civilian bombardment became the regime's primary military strategy, then provided diplomatic assistance for the forced displacement that followed. That became US policy post-Russian intervention.
There are actual figures in DC think tanks who endorsed this policy, dressed it up as "reconciliation", and now lobby against sanctions, who based their entire approach to policy on Idlib's population of 3 million people falling back under regime control.
They portray this as pragmatism, rather than barbarism. If a potential Biden administration wants to start stabilising the situation in Syria, it can start by making sure these figures are never allowed anywhere near Middle East policy again.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
