US explanations of the Islamist attacks: two dominant views equally wrong

US explanations of the Islamist attacks: two dominant views equally wrong
the truth is that the Arab Spring’s revolutions were primarily Islamist – democratic slogans were a “byproduct” of Islamists’ aspirations. This is what Russian representatives have been saying all along – to no avail. The second view, calling on Obama to be even more “proactive” in his support for Syrian rebels, achieving a spectacular military victory instead of “leading from behind,” as it was the case in Libya, is even more absurd. Being more active in bringing to power – whom? The same Islamist militias which are now in fact ruling Syria?