... or Get Off the Pot

I suppose that, deep down, the President is waiting for a miracle in Syria. 

Maybe the Syrian rebels - our guys, not al Qaeda's guys - will win a smashing victory,  oust Bashar al-Assad, and establish a stable, pro-American government.

Maybe the proposed peace conference will actually meet, overcome the unanimous desire of its participants to slaughter each other, and hammer out a coalition government fairly representing all of Syria's races, religions and interest groups.

Or maybe the American people will, without guidance from their political leaders, arrive at a consensus which permits Mr. Obama to act boldly - if action contingent upon polling data can ever be said to be bold.

Personally, I think he's just dithering - something this President has elevated to a Zen-like practice.

As for miracles, I'm guessing the Middle East used up its allocation several millennia ago. 

And if anyone wants what Sir Winston would have called my appreciation of the situation, it's this:  Syria is descending from one circle of Hell to the next while the world's only superpower wrings its hands and hopes for the best.

It's time for America either to act - or to declare that Syria is none of our business and turn our attention to other things.

Please understand.  I'm not at all sure we should concern ourselves with Syria.  To be honest,  I'm more interested in issues such as global climate change; the widening gulf between America's 1% and the rest of us; corporate domination of politics in the Western democracies; and the Cardinals' latest winning streak.

Besides, a war which boils down to enraged Middle Eastern tribes butchering each other over obscure ethnic and sectarian differences seems to me - while regrettable - pretty much a case of "dog bites man".

It's an over-populated planet.  Every little bit helps.

Still, it's impossible to pretend that America has no stake in the matter.  Syria isn't a big country, but it's strategically located.  Like much of the Arabic-speaking Near East - Syria is a society fractured into so many groups that it may well be unable to function without an imperial overlord or a murderous strongman.

America's most significant interests would include these:

Syria has chemical weapons, and a demonstrated willingness to use them.

Syria borders Israel.

Syria has its tentacles in Lebanon - a state which, left alone, might actually be capable of returning to a condition of advanced civilization.

Perhaps most importantly, Syria is a client of our local nemesis, Iran, and of our re-emerging would-be nemesis, Russia.

Given the limits of present-day technology, relocating Syria so that it no longer abuts Israel seems a non-starter.

On the other hand, a reasonably good outcome in the current civil war might well address the remaining issues.  Certainly, a more tractable government in Damascus might conceivably cool Syria's relations with Iran and Hezbollah, the most dangerous Islamist group in the region.

A new government installed with active military assistance from the United States might even allow us to draw Syria's chemical teeth. 

Moreover, America's stakes continue to rise.  Russia has pledged to provide anti-aircraft missiles to the Assad regime, and that's not something we should stand for.  Russia is a country we should be cultivating as a potential long-term partner - but its evolution toward democracy and the rule of law have been interrupted by the perpetual presidency of Vladimir Putin.

As long as Putin can ignore his country's urgent needs - by rallying nationalist nostalgia for the good old days when the Soviet Union was a super-power - Russia will remain stuck in the mud.

So there's a strong case to be made for resisting any attempt by Putin to make a big show in foreign affairs.  Syria represents a chance to take him down a peg, and such a chance shouldn't be missed.

Likewise, Hezbollah has committed to sending fighters into the Syrian conflict - which gives us a legitimate opportunity to kill them wholesale.

Hezbollah is a tough bunch, and sending in our troops against them would result in significant American casualties.  But in armed conflict, I'd bet on elite US Army and Marine units - with good air cover - against Hezbollah.  And taking a crack at exterminating Hezbollah - a finite force in a small, well-defined area - seems a lot more realistic than chasing the Taliban around the trackless mountains and valleys of Waziristan.

There's another issue - to my mind, the largest issue - and that's the demographic impact of civil war on Syria's future.  But that issue is so unfamiliar - because so often ignored - that it deserves its own post. 

For now, my message to the Obama administration would be this:  Dithering is not prudence, or patience, or doing your homework.  Dithering is dithering - and it's the diametric opposite of leadership.

It's time for Mr. Obama to do something ...or get off the pot.

The Internet Illusion

There are times when I enjoy playing the curmudgeon.  (Heaven knows I'm getting old enough.)  So let me just say this upfront.

You can't change the world online.

In recent months, I've grown increasingly grumpy with well-intentioned people who seem to believe you can.  As I write this, I've just gotten another plea from the President's "grassroots" campaign - Organizing for Action - to sign its petition demanding that the Senate pass stronger background checks for weapons purchases.

I'll probably sign, but not before I finish this curmudgeonly grumble.  Because America's progressives and liberals need a serious reality check.

For the last few weeks, it seems like every third person on my newsfeed has posted some expression of outrage that the Senate ignored the wishes of 90% of Americans in order to satisfy a small minority opposed to background checks.

Note that word "wishes".  

Because there's a vast difference between the wishes of a majority and the will of the people.

Wishes are for greeting cards and animated kiddie flicks.  Will is about commitment, sacrifice, and hard work.  About having some skin in the game.

It's becoming increasingly easy to express our wishes through such ephemeral means as internet petitions.  And powerful interests will occasionally deign to grant a token victory to such wishes - reversing an ill-considered personnel decision or adjusting some obnoxious policy or rule.

Something that doesn't cost much.

But when real power, or serious money, is at stake, the people who run things will yield only to the aroused, stubborn, persistent force of the popular will.

And that's much harder to come by.

In the case of background checks, the opposition consists of a small minority of Americans - perhaps three to five million citizens.  But if those opponents make up only a small percentage of voters, they have the advantage of being focused, single-issue voters. 

Any incumbent who displays less than 100% loyalty to their definition of Second Amendment rights can be certain of facing their wrath.  They will vote, and raise money, and work assiduously to defeat that incumbent in the next election.

They might be a tiny minority, but they have will.

And our Senators understand that.

Imagine, for a moment, an equal number of well-organized citizens on the other side - absolutely dedicated to eliminating assault-style weapons, or banning large ammo clips, or imposing mandatory background checks.  Citizens willing to do whatever it took to defeat any Senator who refused to vote their way.

Then we'd have a fair fight.

But that's not America in the Age of Obama.  On a host of issues - gun control, environmental protection, marriage equality, reproductive rights, etc.  - genuine liberal/progressive activism is hard to find.

We've substituted virtual activism - and that's not the same thing.

In America, power comes from electoral majorities - not from polls, online petitions, or changing our profile pics. 

Power comes from winning elections - and not just Presidential elections.

It comes from winning congressional elections, legislative elections, even those seemingly trivial local elections in which future governors, senators and presidents get their start.

It comes from finding good people and turning them into candidates - for every seat.

And those candidates don't have to be Democrats.  Independents will often do just as well, or better.

Winning elections requires, above all, three raw materials:  money, manpower, and expertise.

Since Howard Dean's insurgency, in 2004, political campaigns have learned how to raise money online.  But to date, there's no internet substitute for manpower - the boots-on-the-ground, door-to-door, retail politics that wins elections.

America's liberal/progressive forces need an army of citizens willing to put in the hours, pound the pavement, and cope with snarling dogs and slammed doors.

Citizens who realize that changing America requires more than sitting in a coffee shop, sipping a latté, and double-clicking on an internet petition.

For therein lies the danger.  The ease, convenience, and potential anonymity of online petitions and other such expressions have deluded too many into believing they have actually taken action - when all they've done is make themselves feel better.

Real-world politics takes very little account of facile gestures.  It demands commitment - the choice to get into the arena.

The rich, the powerful, the bigoted, and the profligate will yield only to superior force in the form of millions of mobilized voters.  Wishes will not suffice.

And really, that's as it should be.  Whatever your specific cause - sane weapons laws, stopping the Keystone XL pipeline, legalizing same-sex marriage, or restoring a society where any child can aspire to rise as far as her abilities and efforts can take her - it should demand real sacrifice.

In historical terms, despite occasional presidential elections, America's liberal/progressive forces have been in retreat for the past four decades.  Only by educating ourselves, sharpening our arguments, mobilizing our forces, and doing the hard work - for any one issue - will we fit ourselves for the countless other battles which need to be fought.

It's about building character, and teamwork... 

And will.  Real change demands real commitment.  It demands an act of will.

We can build a future worthy of our past, and worthy of our promise.  But wishing won't make it so.