WarSclerotic

Last week’s attack at the national security headquarters in Damascus was a major blow for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Many consider it to be the turning point in the Syrian crisis that will eventually lead to Assad’s fall.

The tyrant in Damascus, however, seems to be the last one to realize that. The Syrian army has indeed been severely weakened (there were more desertions over the weekend), but it is still intact and fighting back. It’s not surprising that Damascus hurried to deny the scoop by the Russian Ambassador in Paris, Alexander Orlov, that Assad had agreed to step down, but will only leave in a civilized manner. Perhaps Moscow wanted to compensate the international community for casting its third veto at the U.N. Security Council, which has been pushing for harsher sanctions against the Syrian regime, and decided to do so by making up a story. It was possibly even a trial balloon floated by Syria. Either way, Assad is still around.

Syria’s opposition forces were the big losers from the Russian veto, but U.S. President Barack Obama has also lost out as the Syrian crisis has turned into a personal failure. His diplomatic efforts with European nations have been fruitless.

As far as Obama is concerned, the deterioration of the situation in Syria couldn’t come at a worse time: Everyone expects the man with the Nobel Peace Prize to put an end to the slaughter of innocent Syrians, but there is no getting around the fact that in less than four months, Americans will be going to the polls again. The last thing Obama needs is American troops returning from Syria in body bags. In either case, Obama loses. No surprise then that his Republican adversary, Mitt Romney, points to the Syrian crisis as further evidence of the president’s foreign policy failure.

It’s difficult to defend Obama’s track record on Syria. While Moscow and Tehran are openly aiding Assad, Washington has passed the matter on to the U.N. and the Arab League’s special envoy, Kofi Annan. His success has been marginal. It hasn’t even been symbolic.

Obama’s failure in Syria is symptomatic of his failure with Russia. The administration was so proud of how it was pushing the “Reset” button with Moscow — Clinton-Lavrov, remember? What is left of that today?

The big question isn’t only how much time Assad has left, but also what Washington does in that time. According to U.S. media reports, Obama told Russian President Vladimir Putin on March 27 that after the elections he would be much “more flexible” to take action on the Syrian front. In the meantime, his lack of action could, among other things, cost him the election in November.

U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice was furious following the Russian veto and promised that the U.S. would find a way around the Security Council. This still does not mean that the U.S. will send weapons or intervene militarily. Washington will help the Syrian rebels with intelligence information and humanitarian aid.

The imbalance between what Washington is providing and what is coming out of Moscow is obvious in the field. If and when the rebels topple Assad, they will first and foremost have themselves to thank. They will have succeeded, alone.