Cogito Ergo Non Serviam

Russia Bombs Syrian Rebels

The Syrian Civil War entered a new phase this week, with Vladimir Putin announcing a new pro-Damascus coordination effort with Iran, Iraq and the Al Assad regime in Syria. Earlier today, the Russian parliament voted to allow Russian intervention in the conflict. The media are now reporting, and the Kremlin has confirmed, that Russian air assets have struck Syrian rebels. Meanwhile, the UN Security Council is debating the situation.

While it is not clear which faction was on the receiving end of the bombs, it is unlikely that the Russians had targeted the Islamic State, given where the attack occurred. The Russian defense ministry has stated that ISIS was actually the target, but US officials have told Reuters that ISIS is not present in the section of Homs province where the Russians struck.

The intervention of Mr. Putin's forces creates a dilemma for the US and its allies. Mr. Putin's policy, which now will be backed up by violence, is to ensure that the Al Assad regime remains in power and regains control of Syria in its entirety. This means that, while ISIS will be on the receiving end of some Russian bombing runs, Russia will take on all rebel entities in an effort to shore up Damascus.

America and its allies, however, believe that the defeat of ISIS depends in part on the removal of Basher al Assad as Syria's president. The brutality of the regime (such as the use of barrel bombs on civilian population centers), the argument goes, is one of the most effective recruitment arguments for ISIS. As a result, the west is actually aiding some of the rebel groups (how effectively is a matter of debate).

Thus far, the US is taking a cautious approach. A US defense official told Reuters, "A Russian official in Baghdad this morning informed US embassy personnel that Russian military aircraft would begin flying anti-Isil [IS] missions today over Syria. He further requested that US aircraft avoid Syrian airspace during these missions." Later, US state department spokesman John Kirby told reporters: "The US-led coalition will continue to fly missions over Iraq and Syria as planned and in support of our international mission to degrade and destroy Isil [IS]."

This is not a tenable situation, and it would be better if all the parties engaged worked out some kind of modus operandi. Moreover, the sooner this get done the better. With numerous nations flying in Syrian airspace and doing so without coordination (or failing that communication), the odds of a mistake soar. And that is something the world can ill-afford.

As for Russia, Mr. Putin is now putting his nation in the middle of a struggle between the Sunni and the Shi'ites, on the side of the latter. As Jonathan Marcus of the BBC wrote Russia "could get drawn into the Syrian quagmire. The Russian air force lacks many of the precision-guided capabilities and intelligence gathering resources of the US. A Russian military involvement could be messy, stoking up antipathy both at home and abroad. Mr Putin is basking in a sense of achievement right now. But it is by no means clear that Russia's brutally pragmatic approach to the Syrian crisis is any more likely to deliver a settlement."

The parallel with Afghanistan is an easy one to draw. How accurate that is remains to be seen.

© Copyright 2015 by The Kensington Review, Jeff Myhre, PhD, Editor. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written consent. Produced using Ubuntu Linux.



Kensington Review Home