For the record I don’t think you, or all opponents of military action in general, are Assad apologists. When I used that label I was referring to people who deploy all sorts of conspiracies to obsfucate his role in the war.
I think we may just disagree on what a plausible path forward towards ending the war may be. I don’t think the American role right now is a serious hurdle towards drawing down the main conflict between the regime and its opponents. In my view, the only way the war can end is through some degree of political settlement that involves genuine concessions from the regime, however imperfect like a Taif agreement. I don’t include Assad actually going amongst those concessions, or even being held to any sort of account.
The status quo scorched earth path, guarantees more refugees ahead, more deaths, more destruction of urban infrastructure and no chance any of the new or existing refugees ever return.
Unfortunately, the only way I currently see the war “ending” in any way, shape or form, is in a scenario in which Assad wins the war. Anything else pretty much guarantees the war will continue. So long as Assad has his backers, he isn’t going anywhere. Especially when he continues to regain territory.
Even that scenario is far from ideal and doesn’t guarantee the stability pre-war Syria used to have. As you mentioned, a lot of people will die as he continues to gain ground. Very likely those from the previously besieged towns that were transported to the North by his government will suffer, or worse.
That said, the war would end, or at least begin to wind down.
Concerning Assad making political concessions, I don’t think he’ll make any concessions until he takes control of the country again. He appears dead set on taking back all (or most) of the territory first, before pivoting to a different direction. Whether or not he decides to negotiate afterwards remains to be seen, but hoping he makes concessions while he’s currently gaining ground in the war is a dead end, imho.
I do strongly believe that Assad has to make major adjustments in how he runs Syria, should he win. He would be a fool to do things the way he did prior to the war.
Concerning the U.S., I don’t want them to complicate things any further than it already has. The Obama Administration funded and trained several rebel groups with the intent of fighting ISIS and/or cause regime change. A lot of rebel groups ended up with strong jihadist elements as time went on. The Trump Administration focused on the Kurds in order to fight ISIS and gain leverage against Assad via a large fighting force and controlling oil fields in the East. Ultimately, it drew Turkey in the conflict and resulted in the Kurds being dropped by the U.S.. Said Kurds had to seek aid from Assad, of all people, in their fight against Turkey.
In both cases, the U.S. wasn’t aiming for those end results, but it’s involvement further complicated the situation and possibly made it deadlier.
Furthermore, I don’t see how the US current military involvement in Syria benefits its interest. I see how it benefits its allies (Saudi Arabia and Israel), but the US itself is basically getting itself involved in a lose-lose situation.
The US (and the international community) should, at this point, focus on finding an end to the war via a political solution. There is no military solution it can exploit to make that happen. That ship has sailed years ago.
.