Putin changes game rules in Syria

The rules of engagement in Syria are changing fast as Russia takes the lead and puts itself into the driver’s seat amid confusion and contradictions in the positions of the western alliance led by the United States. President Vladimir Putin has stepped up his country’s military presence in Syria in a bid to bolster the rattled regime of Bashar Assad and kick in a new strategy to battle the pressing threat of militants.
By the time this article is published Putin and President Barack Obama would have had their much anticipated summit in New York. Putin and Obama have delivered their speeches at the UN General Assembly and there was little hint of an impending compromise over Syria.
Russia has dispatched military advisers and almost 2000 marines to Syria, specifically to an airbase near Latakia. It has sent fighter jets, tanks and modern weaponry to help the ailing Damascus regime defend strategic areas after a series of losses. Moscow’s bold intervention has stunned Washington and raised questions about its ultimate goals. Some analysts believe that Putin has moved in to prevent the regime from collapsing as various extremist groups, including Al-Qaeda-linked Al-Nusra Front, made key advances in Idlib in the north and threatened to march into the strategic coastal plain of Syria. Meanwhile, other rebel groups have also made gains in the Damascus countryside. In the meantime there are no signs that Daesh militants are retreating in Riqqa and other areas under their control especially in eastern Syria.
The Russian moves have weakened the western position. The immediate removal of Assad is no longer a precondition for a political solution. This is the new stand taken by London, Berlin and even Paris. For Europe the influx of hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees, and fear of terrorist infiltration, has changed the rules of the game. Germany now says it is ready to mediate between Assad and his rivals to form a transitional government. Assad’s imminent departure is no longer on table and his presence in a transitional phase will be tolerated.
US Secretary of State John Kerry announced after meeting Iran’s Foreign Minister Jawad Zarif that he sees an opportunity to bring a political solution in Syria and Yemen. The new US effort could bring Russia and Iran into an enlarged coalition that includes Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Ankara’s about-face is more likely than that of Riyadh. But Putin is talking to all parties and he seems to have the initiative. The recent announcement that Russia, Iraq, Iran and Syria have set up a “joint information center” on Daesh could be seen a slap in Washington’s face, whose campaign to defeat the militants and train moderate opposition fighters in Syria have been described as ineffective.
For Russia the Syria card is of pivotal importance. Aside from the naval assets that Moscow has in Tartus it now seeks to build at least two new airbases. This will give it permanent presence along the Eastern Mediterranean. Defeating Daesh, which has hundreds if not thousands of fighters from Chechnya, is a strategic goal for Putin. But the Syria involvement has provided the Kremlin with the chance to break out of its international isolation following its takeover of Crimea. Some see Moscow’s stepped up intervention in Syria and Iraq as a response to America’s regional failures in resolving the crises in both countries.
But Russia’s gambit in Syria carries risks as well. So far Putin has said that no Russian soldiers will fight in Syria. But can a rehabilitated regime army defeat the jihadists on its own? And what will happen if the so called moderate rebels, including the Free Syrian Army (FSA) are targeted? In Putin’s view Russia’s support of the “legitimate” Assad government is in accordance with the UN charter, but further military involvement could become a clarion call for more foreign fighters to pour into Syria. Putin still needs to sway Saudi Arabia into accepting a role for Assad in a transitional government.
And then you have the Syrian National Coalition which has refused any role for Assad in Syria’s future. Putin would seek to divide the Syrian coalition and isolate those who insist on Assad’s departure. And finally you have the rest of Syrian rebel groups on the ground who are not part of Al-Nusra Front or Daesh and who are against Moscow’s involvement.
Assad’s political survival will boost Iran’s intervention in Syria, something that Gulf states view with increased anxiety. Their response to Putin’s latest overtures will rest largely on his vision for the future of Iran and Hizbollah in Syria and by extension Iraq. Moscow’s growing presence in the region will alter the geopolitical structure of the region which has been an American domain for decades.
There is always the risk that Moscow would repeat the mistakes of the past and find itself stuck in a region that is both volatile and chaotic. Certainly the Russian adventure in Syria cannot be compared to Putin’s interventions in Chechnya, Georgia and the Ukraine. But for now the logic in war-torn Syria has been transformed from regime change to recruiting that regime to fight terrorism.