╌>

Putin's Plan for Syria ................... How Russia Wants to End the War

community » Discussions » Category » News & Politics » Discussion » Putin's Plan for Syria ................... How Russia Wants to End the War
  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  colour-me-free  •  7 years ago  •  3 comments

Putin's Plan for Syria ................... How Russia Wants to End the War

There has been recent conversation regarding Turkey and Erdogan ... I think this article offers a glimpse at things that are taking place in Syria between Russia, Turkey, Iran regarding power in Syria and Assad....

...............

After nearly seven years, the Syrian civil war is finally winding down, and the Middle East’s various powers are looking ahead to what comes next. On November 22, the leaders of   Iran, Russia, and Turkey   met in the Russian resort town of Sochi to discuss Syria’s future, and on November 28, the latest round of UN-sponsored talks between representatives of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and the opposition began in Geneva. Another round of talks in Sochi is planned for early next year.

Through military intervention and diplomatic maneuvering, Russian President Vladimir Putin has made his country into one of the   major players   in the Syrian conflict. Russia went into Syria in September 2015 to defeat the Islamic State (ISIS) and to block an attempt at regime change by outside powers such as the United States and Saudi Arabia. More than two years later, Moscow’s military engagement has paid off. Assad’s regime has survived and ISIS has been defeated. The war is still not over, but the focus is increasingly on a future political settlement. Russia will not be able to impose this settlement alone, or even together with its allies, Iran and Turkey. But it will be as   involved in the Syrian peace   as it was involved in the Syrian war.

A TANGLED WEB

Among the issues now at play in Syria, the fate of Assad stands out. During the war, Moscow saw him as someone to be bailed out for the sake of preventing chaos. Now he looks and behaves like a victor, and may be thinking that he does not need the Russians as much as he used to. Assad looks down on the opposition and wants his Baath Party to become dominant again. The Kremlin, however, understands that restoring his control over all of Syria is impossible and even undesirable, since other groups, from the Sunni opposition to the Kurds, adamantly reject this outcome. Assad may stay in power in Damascus, but the country’s political landscape has changed irreversibly. Still, Moscow has to deal with a recalcitrant Assad while taking account of the influence exerted by its other ally, Tehran.

Even without formal federalization, Syria is de facto divided into several enclaves controlled by   different forces : the Assad government; anti-Assad opposition groups; pro-Turkish and pro-Iranian militias; and the Kurds. Russia has worked with many players, both on the ground in Syria and across the region, to create several de-escalation zones, where fighting has stopped and the opposition has been allowed to remain in control. Through its efforts in Astana, Geneva, and Sochi, Moscow has sought to build common ground between all of the country’s contending factions, paving the way for some form of a coalition government. Assad is reluctant to agree to genuine power sharing, and Iran has its own reservations. Thus Moscow will have to do a lot of persuading and occasionally pressuring to achieve its preferred outcome. The Russians believe, however, that a communal power-sharing arrangement akin to Lebanon’s could be a recipe for stability.






Russia insists on the territorial unity of Syria. Moscow takes a similar attitude toward Iraq, where it recently refused to support independence for Iraqi Kurdistan. In Syria as in Iraq, however, Russia favors real autonomy for the Kurds. Over many decades, Moscow has had a long-standing relationship with the Kurdish groups in the Middle East, sometimes assisting them politically and militarily. Russia is used to balancing its relations with the Kurds and with their Arab, Turkish, and Iranian neighbors, and is itself home to a small Kurdish diaspora that facilitates Russian-Kurdish contacts and lobbies for Kurdish interests. In the end, however, it is Russia’s national interest in maintaining contacts with all the relevant players that will win out.

Russia, of course, is not the only outside power in Syria. Even as Moscow supported the Assad regime with its air power, Iran and its allied militias were fighting on the ground. After the war, Tehran wants to institutionalize its presence on the ground in Syria, both to influence the future of that country and to maintain a physical link to its main regional ally, Hezbollah.

Russia understands Iran’s interests without sharing them, but it also understands Israel’s, and it seeks to strike a balance between the two. Moscow   empathizes   with Israel’s security concerns about the presence of armed Shiite groups too close to its border, and hopes to use the Russian diaspora in Israel for economic, financial, and technological benefit. But it cannot ignore Iran, a regional power and a neighbor that also offers opportunities in a number of areas, from arms sales to nuclear energy. Thus in Syria Russia will seek to broker a compromise between Iran and Israel based on the legitimate interests of each. Iranian Shiite allies might stay in Syria, but they will have to keep their distance from Israel.

Russia’s   interaction with the United States   in Syria is largely focused on military deconfliction, which is aimed at preventing incidents between the two countries’ armed forces. Moscow and Washington have also cooperated on the establishment of de-escalation zones, but the Kremlin’s diplomatic coordination with the United States is much less intense under the administration of President Donald Trump than under his predecessor, Barack Obama. In 2015 and 2016, the Russians still entertained the thought of jointly developing and implementing a diplomatic solution with the Americans. But today, thanks to waning interest in and a lack of engagement from Washington, Moscow has teamed up with the Turks and the Iranians instead.

THE LONG ROAD AHEAD










Russia realizes that with the war waning and   reconstruction looming , others will begin to step forward in Syria, including China, Europe, and Japan. Moscow will seek to partner with them to secure a piece of the lucrative reconstruction effort, which will be financed by international donors. Russia’s main asset is its influence in Damascus, where it remains the prime guarantor of the Assad regime’s security. This influence may wane over time as direct threats to Assad become less relevant. But for now, with the situation in Syria likely to remain precarious for years, Russia is set to be a major player in the country for the foreseeable future.

Moscow, moreover, means to secure its own core interests in Syria, whatever the balance of political power in the country. Among these is a permanent air and naval presence in the country. Under the lease agreements signed in 2015 and 2016 with Damascus, both the Khmeimim air force base and the Tartus naval facility, which is being upgraded to a regular naval base, will stay in place for decades after the end of the war. The Syrian armed forces will continue to rely on Russian weapons and equipment, and Russian military specialists will continue to advise and train their Syrian colleagues. This will seal Syria’s role as Russia’s main geopolitical and military foothold in the Middle East.

Bringing peace to Syria will be no less difficult than winning a war there. Russia faces another uphill task, one where its assets are less compelling, and where its competitors have more resources, and its situational allies—in Damascus, Tehran, and Ankara—will seek to promote their own agendas, which are sometimes at odds with Moscow’s. Succeeding on the diplomatic front will be even harder than winning on the battlefield

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/syria/2017-12-13/putins-plan-syria?cid=int-lea&pgtype=hpg




Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Colour Me Free
Senior Quiet
1  seeder  Colour Me Free    7 years ago

Russia insists on the territorial unity of Syria. Moscow takes a similar attitude toward Iraq, where it recently refused to support independence for Iraqi Kurdistan. In Syria as in Iraq, however, Russia favors real autonomy for the Kurds. Over many decades, Moscow has had a long-standing relationship with the Kurdish groups in the Middle East, sometimes assisting them politically and militarily. Russia is used to balancing its relations with the Kurds and with their Arab, Turkish, and Iranian neighbors, and is itself home to a small Kurdish diaspora that facilitates Russian-Kurdish contacts and lobbies for Kurdish interests. In the end, however, it is Russia’s national interest in maintaining contacts with all the relevant players that will win out.

...

Russia understands Iran’s interests without sharing them, but it also understands Israel’s, and it seeks to strike a balance between the two. Moscow   empathizes   with Israel’s security concerns about the presence of armed Shiite groups too close to its border, and hopes to use the Russian diaspora in Israel for economic, financial, and technological benefit. But it cannot ignore Iran, a regional power and a neighbor that also offers opportunities in a number of areas, from arms sales to nuclear energy. Thus in Syria Russia will seek to broker a compromise between Iran and Israel based on the legitimate interests of each. Iranian Shiite allies might stay in Syria, but they will have to keep their distance from Israel.

This is going to be interesting to watch unfold ... Putin is even for the autonomy of the Kurdish people.  I get it Putin is a bad dude, but he has some goals that would be beneficial to the region. (?)

 
 
 
Colour Me Free
Senior Quiet
2  seeder  Colour Me Free    7 years ago

Russia’s   interaction with the United States   in Syria is largely focused on military deconfliction, which is aimed at preventing incidents between the two countries’ armed forces. Moscow and Washington have also cooperated on the establishment of de-escalation zones, but the Kremlin’s diplomatic coordination with the United States is much less intense under the administration of President Donald Trump than under his predecessor, Barack Obama. In 2015 and 2016, the Russians still entertained the thought of jointly developing and implementing a diplomatic solution with the Americans. But today, thanks to waning interest in and a lack of engagement from Washington, Moscow has teamed up with the Turks and the Iranians instead.

Collusion?

 
 
 
Colour Me Free
Senior Quiet
3  seeder  Colour Me Free    7 years ago

Israel’s reasons for sending a message to Iran are straightforward: it does not want Syria to become another base for the Iranian regime and its allies. Pro-Iranian forces already threaten Israel from Lebanon, where Israeli officials believe that Hezbollah has more  than 100,000 missiles . Tehran also has established close relations with the militant  Palestinian movement Islamic Jihad  and Hamas’ military wing. And in 2015, after Iran signed a nuclear deal with the United States, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali  Khamenei stated  that Israel “will not see [the end] of these 25 years” and that “Iran will support anyone who strikes at Israel.”

But Tehran was not the only audience for this message. Since Russia entered the Syrian civil war in the fall of 2015, an important shift has taken place: Iran is no longer the strongest foreign power in Syria; Russia is. So far, Russian and Iranian goals in Syria have been aligned, but that is changing as the war enters a new phase. Although Russian President Vladimir Putin would not hesitate to act against Israel if necessary, the two countries have common interests in Syria—and those common interests may help Israel enforce its redline against Iran.

I do not know if anyone out there with knowledge is reading anything beyond ... "Who lies more" and phony bar/line graphs....  but if someone happens to be:

Do you have any thoughts why the US is having NO conversation with Russia - sanctions are in place for Crimea and election meddling (I get that) ................. but what does that have to do with the ME and the events taking place?  This cannot be blamed on the current president - Russia was the boogie man long before 2016!!!  There is a foot on the neck of the current administration over collusion with Russia (although no one has proof) ................ yet it has nothing to do the ME either!

Former President Obama strongly disliked Putin, Assad .... Netanyahu (the oppressors) from the beginning ... there was a campaign of Assad must go, without coming out and saying so .. I believe there was a Netanyahu must go campaign as well (think voters in Israel may even have been unduly influenced as well - speculative on my behalf)

A line of communication needs to be opened .. Obama's foreign policy is no longer valid!

 
 
You must be logged in to post a comment

Who is online






437 visitors