Russia’s intervention tips balance of power for new deal in Syria

WHAT will become of Syria in the medium term? After four years of civil war, it is certainly not possible just to let President Bashar al-Assad govern as if nothing had happened. But it is equally impossible to imagine a ‘democratic’ and united Syria, because the fracture lines run too deep, writes WR expert Charles Millon. It takes no skill in prophecy to predict that we will soon see four autonomous or even independent zones forming in Syria. First of these is the west, the government area, supported by the Russians and Iran, stretching from greater Damascus in the south to Aleppo in the north, including the cities of Homs and Hama. This area of course includes the ‘Alawite heartland’ hugging the coastal mountains, with the port cities of Latakia and Tartus – where the Russian air and naval bases are currently located. It was to defend this zone, covering only 20 per cent of Syria’s land area but containing a large share of its productive assets and more than half of the remaining population, that an informal coalition of Russian, Iranian and Hezbollah forces was assembled and is fighting today. Within the government zone, the Iranians have their own distinct geopolitical designs. Tehran is seeking a strategic continuum from its border with Iraq all the way to Syria and the Hezbollah-controlled territory in Lebanon. This land bridge encompasses the deserts of Iraq and Syria, including Deir ez-Zor and Palmyra. The former city is now cut off and besieged by Islamic State forces, while the latter is in their hands. In Syria’s north-west, a long corridor stretches from the Alawite heartland to Aleppo, the country’s biggest city. This is what many, including the French journalist Georges Malbrunot, refer to as the ‘Turkish-Saudi zone of influence.’ Military groups such as Ahrar ash-Sham and the al-Qaeda-affiliated al-Nusra Front, variously referred to as rebels or terrorists, have their strongholds here. These groups, directly or indirectly, have been armed by the United States. The Turkish government has been demanding for several weeks now that a ‘security zone’ under its effective control be created there. Further to the north-east are the districts under Kurdish influence – obviously a thorn in the side of the Turks. The local Kurds have played their own game, keeping a certain distance from both Iraqi Kurdistan and the Turkish-based militants of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK). So far they have managed to repel the Islamists, taking back Kobane from Islamic State. There can be no doubt now about their de facto alliance with the authorities in Damascus, a fact that has earned them some hatred among the Arab Sunni population. And on a broad front to the east, there is Islamic State. Although the movement has retreated a little in Iraq, it continues to spread into Syria, reaching as far as the gates of Aleppo and Damascus. Will it be possible to completely wipe it out? That is hard to predict, given how little damage aerial bombardment by the Arab-Western ‘coalition’ has been able to inflict so far. Russian air strikes targeted at other terrorist groups actually appear to have helped Islamic State, since it has eliminated hostile forces that had been slowing it down. Looking beyond Syria’s de facto partitioning, it must be acknowledged that President al-Assad today is the last bulwark holding back Islamic States and general chaos. That is why, irrespective of their future intentions, the Russians were right to intervene alongside him. By comparison, it is impossible to see what the United States had been trying to achieve, except perhaps to block the advance of Islamic State. If so, it has been unsuccessful. For a more in-depth look at this subject with scenarios looking to future outcomes, go to our sister site: Geopolitical Information Service. Sign in for 3 Free Reports or Subscribe.

RB metadata

ID: 

1448506156646154300