Indian Defence Review

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s unexpected announcement on March 14, 2016 to the effect that Moscow would withdraw its forces in Syria since the main objectives of its intervention in Syria had been accomplished was cheered by President Obama and leaders across the world for a variety of reasons such as: providing UN led peace moves in Geneva to succeed and hence facilitating a peaceful transition to a new political dispensation after eighteen months of a government in transition and elections, thereafter. The UN envoy to Syria Staffan De Mistura has said “I hope this development will have a positive impact on the progress of the negotiations in Geneva aimed at achieving a political solution to the Syrian conflict and a peaceful political transition.“

However, Syria’s Foreign Minister Walid Moallem has disappointed the West and Assad’s detractors by stating “the rebels need not nurture any illusions that Assad’s position is negotiable”.As a matter of fact, the UN arrangement leading up to the present position did not specifically mention Assad in the terms of reference to bring about the mandated changes.

To begin with, the notion that Moscow dovetailed its Syria intervention merely for the sake of a prolonged hegemony to challenge Western strategic interests in the region, in general and Syria in particular, is a fallacy, and therefore, flawed. However, as it happened for Moscow- its military prowess was visibly demonstrated through (a) successful air strikes in support of Syrian ground forces and (b) enabling the recovery of many areas, where the ISIS had got well entrenched and (c) giving a shot in the arm to government forces and thereby boosting their morale. (even though such a move was clearly perceived to be anti-West.)

However, despite the Russian intervention and Moscow’s ostensible reason for doing so, the IS continues to be well entrenched in much of northern and central Syria including the cities of Raqqa and Palmyra.

Allepo’s rout at the hands of Government forces will spell disaster to the rebels opposing Assad: Say’s the British newspaper The Independent “ if Aleppo falls Syria’s vicious war will take a whole new turn”. After all, it was this city in northern Syria close to the Turkish border which was the symbol of the anti-Assad revolution in 2011. In February 2016 the Russian-US coalition in an attempt to take on the non-moderate rebels, mostly belonging to the al-Qaeda linked Nusra front convincingly vanquished the latter and thereafter dislodged them. However, in doing so it was the so called moderate rebels who were weakened, resulting in tens of thousands of them to flee the area and arrive at a camp site on the Turkish border. This is clearly a situation which goes contrary to the interests of the European Union.

“The leaders of the US and EU are making a grievous error in thinking that Vladimir Putin is a potential ally in the fight against Islamic State, the evidence contradicts them, Putin’s aim is to foster the EU’s disintegration and the best way to do so is to flood Europe with Syrian refugees, and thereby exacerbating the immigration crisis and stoking  Islamophobia.”¹

What is the merit in the aforesaid apprehension?  Purely from how it would be rationalized by the West, should the migration crisis in fact wreck EU economies by the enormity of the financial burden, it would considerably weaken the EU –and the balance of power would clearly shift in Russia’s favour. After all, Russia has a number of bug bears in Europe, stemming from  its position vis a vis Ukraine and its threat from NATO. Besides, the sanctions and economic embargos which have taken a very heavy toll of its already stretched finances due to the falling oil prices. Russia has to clear huge foreign debts by 2017, failing which foreign investment will die down. Furthermore, its budget deficit has to be cut from 7 percent of the GDP at present to 3 percent.

It is precisely for this reason, if not for many others that Western concerns about Russia’s sustained or prolonged intervention in civil war torn Syria are grossly misplaced. Russia is also wary of the US attempt to make its Sunni allies in West Asia notably Turkey and Saudi Arabia to make it appear that Moscow is the villain in civil war torn Syria. Even though Russia has, more often than not, gone hammer and tongs against anti-Assad elements –its main concern is less about protecting Assad- than about retaining the core of the Baathist State, which Moscow believes is vital for the survival of Russia in the long fight against terrorist groups such as the Islamic State.

It is a foregone conclusion that sooner, rather than later circumstances will compel Bashar al Assad to relinquish charge, and the transitional government prior to the elections is only a pointer in that direction – surely Moscow is politically mature enough to realize the repercussions of being oblivious of the above.

Russian Move to Caution Basad al Assad:

If the civil war beleaguered Syria is ever to have a semblance of political stability Assad will be well advised to soften his stand against his political opponents and the Russian curtailment of continued military involvement is intended to send a message to Assad to hasten to pave the way for a Syria bereft of the latter. The fact that the Assad regime unreservedly went along with Moscow, as regards its above decision, shows that Assad has read the writing on the wall.

Russia’s Crucial help:

That having been said there is clearly no doubt that the Russian air strikes many with fifth generation aircraft have made an effective, if not a paradigm shift in destroying many IS facilities. The 9000 sorties since September 2015 have destroyed 209 IS oil production units, besides helping the Baghdad regime to re-occupy many strategic zones cleared by the IS and al Nusra. In spite of attributing other motives, the West has, grudgingly accepted the Russian role as one of  “positive contribution”.

Russia has decided to maintain token forces to ensure that the ceasefire which came into effect about two weeks back and has been quite successful, thus far, remains unviolated. It naval facility at Tartous in the Mediterranean and its airbase at Khameimim will continue to be operational and Russia’s S 400 air defence missiles will remain –so that the Russian withdrawal in not exploited by those throwing a spanner in efforts towards a peaceful resolution of the vexed Syrian problem. Of course, there are allegations that Russia has not stuck to its word and it is still attacking hostile positions.² 

Civil War in Syria:

The gravity of devastation is of mindboggling proportions: an estimated 250000 people have perished and 5 million displaced causing the largest refugee crisis known to mankind. If EU is leaving no stone unturned to stem the torrent of migrant intake, it has sufficiently strong reasons to do so.

The world would definitely heave a sigh of huge relief if peace returns to troubled Syria.