Breedlove's statement, "These indiscriminate weapons used by both Bashar al-Assad, and the non-precision use of weapons by the Russian forces, I can't find any other reason for them other than to cause refugees to be on the move and make them someone else's problem"
Except barrel bombs are being used by Syria, not Russia. So, it seems more likely that Assad is weaponizing refugees, if anyone.
If you go to the
transcript, I find a lot of interesting things. When asked a follow up question about the comment that Putin is weaponizing migration (p.72)
"I think I have to step back a little bit in the conflict to start first with Bashar al Assad because this story builds from that point..."
About the Russians:
"And it is hard to tell from what their real intent is."
And then goes on to speculate that he can't think of any other reason than to create refugees, particularly ones fleeing to Europe.
I can think of a lot of reasons to target civilians indiscriminately. We did so in the Vietnam war. In the American Civil War, whole cities were burned to the ground to remove civilian support in the form of goods, services, food, medical assistance.
The mass movement of civilian populations can also make it hard for the anti-Assad forces to maneuver, or burden them with providing aid to fleeing civilians. Senator Cotton goes on to suggest that Assad might be motivated by ethnic cleansing. Breedlove responds "Yes, sir."
For me, it is more plausible that Assad and perhaps Putin want to move people out who might otherwise directly or indirectly support the forces seeking Assad's overthrow, and possibly to try and undermine the resolve of those forces by "strategic" bombing, not unlike what Germany did against the UK and the Allies did later against Germany.
A final point, he hangs his Russian statement on their use of non-precision weaponry. Isn't it possible that they are just indifferent to civilian casualty, and that non-precision bombs are cheaper?
In one hundred pages of testimony, he only refers to Russian precision twice.
That said, would Russia like to see the EU and NATO rend themselves apart? They wouldn't lose any sleep over it, and they do stand to benefit in their Ukrainian adventure if such a thing transpired. And Trump is saying things that undermine NATO - "NATO is costing us a fortune, and yes, we’re protecting Europe with NATO, but we’re spending a lot of money."
