More Russia in Syria

Hamid Bayati a few days ago asked some questions about Syria for publication by the Iranian Mehr News Agency in Farsi and in the Tehran Times in English. This was before the Russian strikes. I answered:

Q: According to recent developments it seems new era begins in Syria to bring peace to this country and Iran and Russia leading the efforts to kick out terrorist groups from Syria, how do you evaluate this issue?

A: From my perspective, the problem is more complicated than kicking terrorist groups out of Syria. The key question is what comes next. Most analysts here think Bashar al Assad will not be able to reestablish his authority over areas that have been in rebellion. If this is correct, political transition and countering terrorism have to proceed at the same time. President Rouhani’s notion that the terrorists can be defeated and only then will it be possible to talk about political reform is unrealistic.

Q: Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned that any attempts to overthrow the government in Syria could lead to a failed state like Iraq or Libya, what is your idea about this view?

A: It could, but it needn’t. A negotiated political transition could provide the legitimate authority required to avoid a failed state. If a political solution does not happen, Syria will continue fragmenting into a patchwork of areas of control, with Kurds along much of the northern border with Turkey, relatively moderate insurgents in the south, extremists in the center and east, and the regime in Damascus and the west.

Q: In recent weeks we saw different news about Russia and China military activity in Syria, how do you evaluate this issue?

A: Chinese deployment is still a matter of speculation. Russia has already deployed

I doubt a couple of thousand Russians will be more effective than a similar number of Americans or Europeans. Russian air attack capabilities are significantly less accurate and effective than those of NATO countries. Collateral damage and the political backlash are likely to be greater.

The Russians can also expect to be targeted by suicide bombers, improvised explosive devices and other terrorist weapons. My guess is that Moscow has put itself on a slippery slope to much greater involvement in Syria, which cash-strapped President Putin can ill afford.

Q: Some experts say US agrees with Russia’s new approach in Syria? Is it true? If true what reasons led to West agree with Russia on Syria?

A: Washington unquestionably agrees that the Islamic State must be defeated, but the Americans are unlikely to align themselves openly with Russia in Syria, if only to avoid alienating the majority Sunni population there. US forces are not attacking Bashar al Assad’s forces, but Washington sees no solution in Syria without a commitment that he leave power. Moscow and Washington do however have to deconflict their military operations, to avoid any unintentional clash.

Q: What do you think about Iran, Russia, Iraq and Syria agreement on cooperation against Islamic State?

A: I think Iraq should get help from wherever useful help can be gotten. I doubt they will get much from Moscow, but that is for Baghdad to decide.

Russia will have to be cautious about appearing to align itself with Shia forces against Sunnis. President Putin is quite rightly concerned about Chechnyan and other Russian extremists. He should be expecting them to strike back not only in Latakia but also inside Russia. The notion that he can kill them all abroad and thereby prevent attacks at home echoes a line used by George W. Bush when the US invaded Iraq. It wasn’t true then and it is not true now.

In general, I don’t think enhanced Russian involvement in Syria and Iraq will make much difference to the course of the war there. Moscow deployed its troops because the Assad regime had weakened to the point that extremists were threatening western Syria, which is the heartland of the Alawite community and also hosts the Russian naval base at Tartous. The relatively modest deployment may block the insurgent advances, but it is unlikely to change the military balance much beyond that.