Deep into a sense of statelessness and fast falling into a pure Hobbesian state of anarchy, Syria demands utmost attention from the agencies of global governance and its prime actors it’s time now both the US and Russia must be convinced that there should be an end to this horrible cauldron at the earliest. The Syrian conflict must be viewed beyond the Sunni-Shia sectarian divide as it is increasingly taking a serious toll on the rest of the world as well
Since 2011, the Syrian crisis is on and now it is almost heading to complete six long years. But no immediate and lasting solution is coming up either from the UN, the rebels or from the regime of Bashar al-Assad. The conflict in Syria is the most consequential one out of all other factors which is fast contributing to the tearing up of the West Asia. Till now, the war has left around 2,50,000 Syrians dead, 7 million internally displaced and more than 3 million forced to flee to the neighbouring nations and then gradually to Europe, triggering a worst-ever refugee crisis in the continent since the Second World War.
The Siege Watch, a joint initiative by PAX Middle East Policy lead and The Syrian Institute, recently reported that the Damascus countryside, as an example, currently has over 5,40,000 people besieged but the UN only acknowledges 1,80,000 and further concluded, over a million Syrians live under siege. Indeed Syrian experts and a host of international agencies highlight the fact that the sieges are absolutely manmade, getting worse each passing day and mostly inflicted by the Assad regime. As America is engrossed in the run up to the Presidential election, and Obama’s so-called “smart diplomacy” and “vision for Middle East” are in wilderness, the Syrian quagmire is not only getting worse but also surely approaching “a point of no return”. Russia emboldened with a brand new jingoism and heroism of Vladimir Putin has taken this opportunity to step into Syria simply to protect the Assad establishment, and is leading the crisis to an open post-Cold War rivalry once again. Whereas Iran under liberal Rouhani, who recently won accolades from his countrymen and the blessings of his grand Ayatollah for negotiating with the West a deal to lift decades of economic sanctions, has been working hard to back the Damascus Government with strong boots on the ground with Shia militias across the world.
Against this backdrop, the crisis in Syria is simply reflecting complete hopelessness and a long-standing humanitarian tragedy is in sight. The current scenario shows the fast and solid advancement of the Assad regime which is near completing the re-occupation of the most populous city of Syria, Aleppo. As The Economist comments, “Unlike the previous ebbs and flows in the brutal conflict, this one looks as if it may prove decisive. In what has long since become a proxy war, Mr Assad’s allies are more dedicated to their cause than the backers of those fighting to oust him; and there is little sign that this will change”.
Simply put, America is currently busy in its presidential election and Obama, being on the last leg of his term, would not be interested to launch any fresh military initiative, which he has not done so far. With Obama’s indecisiveness and big rhetoric, the old American allies, mainly the Sunni nations headed by Saudi Arabia are moving on their own while coming in terms with the Syrian conflict. Hence, till a new President comes to the White House, the US strategy towards Syria in particular and West Asia in general would remain the same. It is frustrating for the rebels who are solely sponsored by the US and the major Sunni nations to oust Assad.
On the other hand, Aleppo, which was out of the reach of Damascus since 2012, is quietly falling into the Government forces, with the constant help from Shia fighters of Iraq and Afghanistan fully facilitated by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC). Further, these ground offensive forces are backed by matchless Russian air strikes to clear their ways ahead. The taking over of Aleppo would boost the Government forces as it could permanently cut off the rebels’ last supply route into Aleppo from the Turkish border. The UN estimates that nearly 3,00,000 people in East Aleppo under rebel control are in danger of being cut off and starved. These kinds of sieges reflect the strategy of the Assad regime, which is purely based on collective punishment. Thus we quite often witness heavy bombings on civilian establishments, including hospitals and schools, by the Government forces. Once the civilians leave, it is easier for the regime to move faster. These tactics are also used as a price of resistance to encircled communities as a whole so that people would force the rebels to accept the terms of the regime.
The recent meeting of the International Syria Support Group (ISSG) in Geneva was suspended due to the Russian-backed offensive in Aleppo. Though America is desperate to get some sort of political process moving, yet its response to the humanitarian crisis within Syria is disappointing. Samantha Power’s acclaimed book, “A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide” (2002) highlights that there has been a lack of US political will in stopping several genocides. It is buttressed by the way current establishment at Washington is handling the humanitarian needs inside Syria wherein thousands are facing extermination from Assad forces. At present the most important issue is the competition and conflict of interest of parties involved in the war rather than focusing on either the fate of Assad or the human tragedy brought by all the actors involved. A political solution for the Syrian crisis is based on the premise of US-Russia sponsorship by which the former has to represent the opposition forces and the latter for Assad. Though the US is really enthusiastic in bringing a solution, yet the Russian side is less interested at the moment. The reason behind is, as Noah Bonsey, a senior Syrian expert at International Crisis Group (ICG) feels, “The Russian military intervention is enabling significant gains by the regime and its allies, including a lot of foreign forces. The pace of those gains is now relatively high, so the Russians may see their interest in pushing militarily for as long as they’re able to make progress, rather than beginning a negotiation process now that would eventually entail concession”. So, the current Kremlinology prefers a festering conflict so that Putin can reap the benefits of Washington’s flawed vision of Syria, may be for a short period. The Munich statement calls for the immediate, sustained delivery of aid to besieged areas, beginning second week of February, 2016. Moscow had initially agreed for such aid, including in the same UN Security Council Resolution that endorsed the basis for Geneva talks, but the Assad regime has blocked aid to besieged areas. Unfortunately, Russia is not showing any interest in forcing the regime to comply with internationally agreed norms for moving aid to civilians.
Ironically, Putin’s intention is to stall the political process as much as possible so that Assad can buy time to re-claim more territories from the opposition forces, including the ISIS. Hence for Russia formidable challenge is not to fight or weaken the ISIS (though it formally announces), but to annihilate the mainstream rebels or opposition forces backed by the US and its allies that participate in the political process.
Today, why re-occupation of Aleppo by the regime is coming to so much of limelight in this more than half-a-decade long-drawn warIJ In 2014, the ICG published a report “As Aleppo Goes, So Goes Syria’s Rebellion” brought to light that almost all the non-jehadi forces sponsored by the US, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, etc, are based in Aleppo mainly. But for the last two years these moderate forces are squeezed by the ISIS from the east, the Kurdish YPG forces on the west and finally the regime forces within the city. The combination of all three forces, now solely the regime soldiers are pushing and giving a crippling blow to the opposition in this region of Syria, which is indirectly questioning the viability of the non-jehadist opposition as a whole.
The regime’s allies, Russia and Iran, expect that the war becomes binary i.e. purely a straight fight between the regime and the ISIS. In such a scenario, there is a vain hope for any political solution. With the weakening of American interest (for now) in the West Asia particularly with its Sunni allies and tilting heavily towards a Shia Iran, the Assad regime then could seek for other elements of the international community to support its survival. It seems the ISIS, which is the most crucial target of all including Syria, is gaining power in this confusion and chaos, wherein the parties involved are working for achieving their own goals. Therefore, the ISIS would remain powerful unless there is a clearly defined strategy in front of all the international players engaged in Syria in co-ordination with Assad so that its menace could be first stopped and then they should work out a transition for the regime.
Syria is a true nightmare now. Its current quagmire is aptly described by Harlan Ullman as, “The loosest analogy is a patient with various forms of cancer in which chemotherapy for curing one exacerbates the others. In simple terms, there are no good ways in or out to resolve this horrific situation”. Deep into a sense of statelessness and fast falling into a pure Hobbesian state of anarchy, Syria demands utmost attention from the agencies of global governance and its prime actors it’s time now both the US and Russia must be convinced that there should be an end to this horrible cauldron at the earliest. The Syrian conflict must be viewed beyond the Sunni-Shia sectarian divide as it is increasingly taking a serious toll on the rest of the world as well.
(The writer is an independent political analyst based in Delhi)