Jonathan Tobin hyperventilates about Syria:

The other consequences represent a catastrophe for American interests. Iran looks to be able to hold onto a crucial ally in Assad who will be more dependent on it than ever. And Russia and China have demonstrated that the notion of a world in which America is the only superpower has been supplanted by one in which America’s former Cold War adversaries have become forces to be reckoned with.

At worst, Iran’s client in Syria will remain in power, and Russia will have helped preserve the status quo at some cost to its international reputation with other Arab states. This can hardly be described as a “catastrophe” for American interests. Iran’s client is weaker than he was a year ago, their proxy in Lebanon has apparently damaged its reputation in popular opinion in the region, and so far no U.S.-friendly and allied governments have suffered significantly because of Syria’s conflict. Russia has been able to help prop up one of its remaining client regimes, but no matter what one thinks about the U.S. role in the world that doesn’t demonstrate that “the notion of a world in which America is the only superpower has been supplanted.” What it demonstrates is that there are limits to what the U.S. and our allies are willing and able to do, and instead of becoming entangled in yet another regional conflict the U.S. has chosen not to stretch its overextended military more than it already has. Because of that, the administration was not wrong to support a negotiated end to the fighting. If the plan to establish a cease-fire falls apart, as it appears it has, that is extremely unfortunate for Syrians, but it does not represent anything like a “catastrophe” for American interests.