Global and Regional Alliances Development on Syria

“The world is full of contradictions today. We need to be frank in asking each other if we have a reliable safety net in place. Sadly, there is no guarantee and no certainty that the current system of global and regional security is able to protect us from upheavals.... The international and regional political, economic, and cultural cooperation organisations are also going through difficult times..”.... Vladmir Putin (Valdai Club speech, October 2014)

From a tale of twist and turns, the Syrian conflict has metamorphosed from that of an Arab Spring solidarity protest to a full blown civil war with religious undertones, serving a practical laboratory for proxy warfare pitting regional and World powers against each other.

Illustration of the current Syrian conflict trend
Source:http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/16/world/middleeast/untangling-the-overlapping-conflicts-in-the-syrian-war.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0

Like an inselberg, the Assad regime has weathered the odds against it albeit the resultant carnage on the Syrian human and infrastructural milieu consequentially, of that Country’s 22million pre-war population, over 250,000 have been killed, about 7.6 million are internally displaced, 4million have fled the Country’s borders and have increasingly fuelled the European migrant/refugee crises. As such, on the current global scale, one out of every four refugees globally is Syrian.

Defying all peace mediation and palliative odds, especially with the active participation of Russia, the Syrian case is actively taking the course of leaving the last bleeding man be declared as victor; for in series of mis-calculated foreign intervention from regional and global powers, the resultant has been a creation of hydra-headed belligerents with no clear vision for the sustenance of the Syrian State.

With Western powers standing aloof at the onset of the Syrian conflict, regional powers of the Middle East championed by Saudi Arabia footed the belligerent cause against the Syrian government in terms of funding and arms. Seeing an opportunity for a balance of power, the Iranian government shored up support for its alleged Shiite spiritual ally in opposition against what it saw as an unbecoming resurging Sunni dominance from the Arab Spring. In the end, rebel groups funded by the Saudi Arabia led coalition of Middle East powers metamorphosed into hardliner Jihadist groups which in turn became a menacing threat to religious tolerance within the region.

Nevertheless, Western powers saw no glory in changing their stance against the Assad regime, choosing instead to derecognize the Assad government in favour of the opposition Free Syria Army. In spite of this, the Assad regime was learnt credence as it labelled the belligerent opposition as ‘terrorists’ and in the real sense of fact, the Syrian political Opposition had no control over the fighters and a times, the opposition belligerents had had to turn the guns on each other as there were gaps in central command control and ideological/religious stance to the conflict.

A caricature cartoon of Russia's Putin propping up Syria's Assad
Source:http://eastwestpublic.com/2015/10/09/russias-syrian-bombing-gives-boost-to-iran/

Amidst the ensuing chaos, Russia stood arms akimbo, preferring to support the Syrian government with resolutions and its veto power at the United Nations. As such, when the United States threatened the Syrian government with airstrikes if it crossed the ‘red line’ in the use of Chemical weapons, Russia pushed for the decommissioning of Syria’s Chemical weapons arsenal which in turn was surprisingly successful.

For four long years since the start of the Syrian conflict, it seems unending as it has defied the cerebral diplomatic intrigues of the World’s top diplomats in Koffi Annan and Lakhdar Brahimi. Not even peace summits in the historic peace convention city of Geneva have brought any beacon of hope to resolving the Syrian conflict.

With all parties and proxies standing firm on their lines and not ready to yield ground, the Syrian conflict became embroiled in a stalemate, threatening to partition the country alongside the line of control of the belligerents. Not even the menacing advance the Islamic State (IS) identified as a common enemy to all parties in the conflict has united the belligerents. Instead, each belligerent has sought to deal with the Islamic State individually whilst pursing their individual causes against each other.

With the Syrian president openly admitting that he might have to concede territory to the enemy in order to consolidate its stronghold in the face of declining manpower, the Russians have seized the initiative to step up military support for the regime, whilst claiming to be doing its bit in fighting terrorism and Islamic extremism as manifested by the Islamic State.

Whilst the United States and its NATO allies have stepped up sortie attacks on Islamic State positions and refusing to collaborate with the Syrian government, rather choosing to identify ‘moderate Syrian rebels’ to train and arm as foot soldiers, the tactics has apparently failed, as the Islamic State keep capturing more territory and the US trained rebels keep melting away in battle against ISIS and gifting the enemy military hardware.

Russia on the other hand has chosen to identify with the Syrian government in the fight against the Islamic State and as such, entered into a de facto coalition with all parties supporting the Syrian government such as Iran, Iraq and Hezbollah.

Source: www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34474362

Despite the identification of a common enemy in ISIS by all belligerents, they have failed to unite under a common cause. This calls to question the historicity of Western powers if they have lessons from World War two when a coalition of Allied powers in United States, United Kingdom and Russia had to fight concomitantly to ensure the defeat of NAZI Germany, and the happenstances thereafter which resulted in the cold war.

As regional and global powers pursue their interests in the Syrian conflict, it must be noted that an inflammable situation which could ignite into a wider conflict is in the offing, as these conflicting powers could accidentally turn their weapons on one another.

Seventy years after the end of the most devastating war in Human history, there are still several applicable lessons to be learnt from World War Two. Regional and Global powers party to the Syrian conflict will profit the cause of global peace by taking revision courses from that epoch.

“The crisis has reached a point where, unless we end the war, the country will slowly empty itself — a haemorrhaging of its brightest and best, it’s young and old, escaping unspeakable horrors in the largest refugee migration since World War II, until all that will be left are the fighters”..... KIM GHATTAS

Regional Developments In The Battle For Syria

In an unfolding tragic tale of twists and turns, the Syrian conflict has transmuted from that of a solidarity show of support for the Arab Spring in 2011 to that of a continuous conflagrative self destruction perpetrated by a cesspool of several armed opposition factions majorly under the umbrella of the Free Syrian Army (FSA), several Jihadi groups notable among which are the Al Nusra Front and the Islamic State (IS); all of which though disunited on the battle front, are fighting a common cause of overthrowing the government of Bashar al-Assad.

Since 2011, when the conflict started, it was insinuated that the Syrian regime will fall, like that of Tunisia and Egypt within a couple of months. As protests against the government simmered, it was met with brute response from the security forces and that gave birth to the armed opposition mostly made up disaffected government soldiers under the umbrella of the Free Syrian Army (FSA). With a resolute government not ready to stand down, the scenario turned from that of protest scenes to a full scale conflict.

As world powers (US, UK, France, China and Russia) bickered on resolutions and counter resolutions to resolve the ensuing conflict, their actions and inaction buoyed by an unstable neighbouring Iraq facing a Jihadi insurgency turned the tide of the conflict to that of an unfolding grotesque. Jihadi fighters under the platform of the Islamic State or ISIS and the Al-Nusra front with a vision of creating an Islamic Caliphate in the entire Middle East launched cross border incursions into Syria. For the Jihadists they had two enemies; the Syrian government and the armed opposition forces. On the long run, the Islamic State (IS) gained much ground and declared a caliphate on conquered territories covering Iraq and Syria.

Haunted by the ripples of past military campaigns in the Middle East notably Iraq, the US and the Western powers though yearning for the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad dithered in active military support for the Syrian Opposition and with the Syrian regime finding active support from Russia, there was no blithe to the aggression of the opposition. As such, the Syrian conflict was left to run its brutal self destructive cause with the hope that the struggle would be resolved on the battle field.

The rise of the Islamic State kitted with sophisticated weaponry captured from the US kitted Iraqi army has changed the face of the conflict. With the capture of large swathes of territory across Iraq and Syria by this group, they seem poised to give a knockout blow to what is left of the regimes in Iraq and Syria and then expanding their conquest beyond. Faced with this threat and brutal executions of hostages by the Islamic state, the US together with a coalition of Western and Arab Countries have begun to take military action, launching airstrikes against IS targets. However, airstrikes alone will not wipe of the capabilities of the Islamic State and whilst the US do have a working relationship with the Iraqi government, the same cannot be said with the Syrian government.

Mapping the Syrian conflict
Source: bbcnews.com

Peace moves has seemed elusive and those arranged in Geneva (Geneva 1 and Geneva 2) between the Syrian opposition and the government ended inconclusively, voiding the wisdom of top diplomats in Koffi Annan and Lakhdar Brahimi.

Lessons learnt from the intrigues of the Arab Spring especially in Libya and the Iraqi story after the US invasion of 2003 has proved that overthrowing strong regimes to the mercies of an uncoordinated opposition doesn’t favour the stability of the State either on the short or long run; therefore, it might be tragic to note that at this stage of the conflict, the US is still trying to identify ‘the moderate armed opposition’ to kit with arms in the fight against the Islamic State.

The Syrian conflict at this stage will be best resolved by the use of force against the Islamic State and other extremist groups and political negotiation between the opposition and government. Seeing that the Syrian Opposition does not have control over the activities of the armed opposition (Free Syrian army) and that the armed Opposition in itself do have a concrete command structure, the sustenance of the regime of Bashar al-Assad becomes expedient for the survival and continuity of the Syrian state.

The Syrian people have suffered untold casualties destruction of their homeland and this has had a spiral effect on neighbouring countries. As such, the conflict should be resolved by pragmatic means at this stage forgiving past misdeeds.

Syria—What next for the revolution?

The Syrian conflict—an offshoot of the famous January 2011 Arab Spring which shook regimes in the Arab world has featured deadly twists and turns since it was caught in the winds of the Arab spring since March 2011.

Starting with mild solidarity protests in favour of the Arab Spring in other Arab nations, the protests metamorphosized into anti-government protests in major Syrian cities. Undecided on how to respond to the protesters, the Syrian government responded with counter protest actions by pro-government supporters and later quelling anti-government protest with outright use of force! The Syrian government forces began firing live rounds into anti-government protest groups! And that became the last straw that broke the camel’s back. The Syrian senario became that of an irreversible conflict senario. Defecting government troops and others ready to take up arms against the government formed the Free Syrian Army. The opposition made some political arrangements and at a point, it was recognized by the Western powers and most Arab countries as the legitimate government of Syria--- but do they really control the fighting wing, let alone the contiguous swathes of territory?

From pockets of skirmishes and uprisings, the Syrian conflict has grown to a full blown conflict or sectarian civil war leaving much of Syria in ruins. Over the last few months, Aleppo, Homs, Idlib, Hama, Idlib, et al, have had parts or almost all of their environs in ruins.

                                                   A devastated Khalidiya district in Homs

With the Syrian conflict taking a sectarian pattern featuring the majority Sunni Population against the minority ruling Alawi and the foreign implications to the conflict, it’s difficult to see an amicable end at sight.

An aerial view of the Khalidiya district of Homs (the Home of the Syrian revolution)

Much to the displeasure and disgust of the majority Sunni Arab neighbours, the Syrian government has received technical and manpower support from Iran and its proxy militia-Hezbollah. At the level of the United Nations, China and especially Russia have shown unwavering support for the Syrian regime of Bashir Al-Assad.

Whilst the Syrian conflict started amid the controversies that engulfed the Western involvement in Libya, the United States, Britain and France were very cautious in militarily supporting the opposition cause; inferring that military support from them will happen only when the Syrian government is seen to have used Chemical weapons against it people.

At the onset of the conflict with fatality figures still in its hundreds, it was thought that it would only be a matter of time before the Assad regime tows the line of Egypt’s Mubarak and Tunisia’s Ben Ali especially with defections of some high ranking government and military officials. Intriguingly, the government has withstood all odds and it appears there will be no letting down in the face of the armed opposition. In fact, it has blamed the armed uprising against it as the work of ‘foreign armed gangs’ and terrorists!. While this statement may be disputable at the onset of the conflict, it’s hard to decipher the allegiances of the armed Syrian opposition. Initially starting out as renegade soldiers and men with munitions; the armed Syrian opposition now comprises of foreign fighters prominent among them-Jihadist from the Al-Nusra front which does have links to Al Queda.

At the early stages of the Syrian conflict, with the Assad regime not buckling with rising armed insurrection, a strategic and tactical arming of the Syrian opposition would have most likely turned the tide. As the conflict wore on to a stalemate, a strategic boost in weaponry and manpower support from Iran and Hezbollah and then influx of Shiite fighters from the Iraqi insurgency has boosted government morale as seen in the takeover of the strategic town of Quasir. This victory for the government troops have spurred up action for military action against other rebel held towns/cities prominent among which is Aleppo and Homs.

On the side of the armed opposition it remains unclear if there’s any unity with the political opposition which seem in disarray especially with the resignation of top shots. Boosted by Sunni militias and Jihadist fighters of Al-Queda leanings from around the middle-east and even world wide, it remains unclear who will receive armed support from western backers if it does eventually comes

Although heavily funded by Sunni Arab led governments top of which is Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the Opposition still needs strategic armaments especially significant air support if they will score a military victory  against Assad’s forces

On the part of the Western powers that have already recognized the Syrian opposition as the legitimate representative of the Syrian people, they have had to reconsider their support in the face of the much detested Alqueda fighting mercenaries spurring up the armed opposition. The question they have to answer is who will they arm?

On the part of the government of Assad, they might claim some vindication now in their reference to the armed Syrian opposition as ‘armed gangs and terrorists’ from the onset of the conflict. And one thing remains clear! In the light of numerous fighting groups making up the Syrian opposition, if they do score military victory at last, the Syrian scenario won’t be different from what obtains in Iraq and Libya. Surely, it will be another recipe for the sectarian disintegration of Syria. On the other hand, after much detest against the Assad regime with so much blood spilled, would it be time for the Western Sunni powers to concede to Assad? After all, his government has stood firm and can only apparently reunite the country’s minority and majority groups sparing sectarian division..

Whilst the Western powers are trying to identify who to arm amongst the Syrian armed opposition, and the Russians, Iranians and Chinese staunchly unwavering in their support for Assad; wouldn’t it be time to consider the outcome of any endgame to the conflict?

Does the world need another addition to perennial disintegrated sectarian states especially in the Middle East awash with weapons? Or a peaceful state.. Whether autocratic or democratic provided there’s no bloodshed on a massive scale?

The answer to this begs the question. Let all players to the conflict ponder on their conscience!