Small Wars Journal

Russian Intervention in Syrian War Has Sharply Reduced U.S. Options

Wed, 02/10/2016 - 9:28pm

Russian Intervention in Syrian War Has Sharply Reduced U.S. Options by David E. Sanger, New York Times

For months now the United States has insisted there is no military solution to the Syrian civil war, only a political accord between President Bashar al-Assad and the fractured, divided opposition groups that have been trying to topple him.

But after days of intense bombing that could soon put the critical city of Aleppo back into the hands of Mr. Assad’s forces, the Russians may be proving the United States wrong. There may be a military solution, one senior American official conceded Wednesday, “just not our solution,” but that of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.

That is what Secretary of State John Kerry faces as he enters a critical negotiation over a cease-fire and the creation of a “humanitarian corridor” to relieve starving Syrians besieged in more than a dozen cities, most by Mr. Assad’s forces. The Russian military action has changed the shape of a conflict that had effectively been stalemated for years. Suddenly, Mr. Assad and his allies have momentum, and the United States-backed rebels are on the run. If a cease-fire is negotiated here, it will probably come at a moment when Mr. Assad holds more territory, and more sway, than since the outbreak of the uprisings in 2011…

Read on.

Comments

Outlaw 09

Fri, 02/12/2016 - 5:50am

Appears that the US does not quite understand who they are actually supporting in Syria right now.....how can they get it so wrong and especially when supposedly the CIA is working with the YPG/SDF and when a 20 SUV US convoy was just in northern Syria at the main YPG/SDF location......

Hezbollah media post exclusive pics taken inside Menage airbase taken by YPG indicate the two militias coordinating.
pic.twitter.com/c9KjKLPhzS

So again just how much of the so called Russian Syria FP is actually the US FP for Syria...??

Outlaw 09

Sat, 02/13/2016 - 6:56am

In reply to by Outlaw 09

Dayuhan...you did notice the highly successful Kerry Munich 1938 meetings where he talked about the rapid providing of humanitarian aid to all towns and villages and his recent statements BEFORE Munich 1938 about the need for Russia to stop their deliberate targeting of civilians...and his reference to the UNSC 2254 signed supported resolution did you not......?

Well humanitarian aid has not "rolled anywhere" in Syria and the bombings are just as heavy now as before Munich 1938.....and you really want me to state the US has FP "creditability"....there is nothing from both Kerry and Obama other than words and more words and more words.....

This is EN subtitled.....and it certainly has not been shown in the US via MSM or the Obama WH.....

ASSad & his allies terrorists airstrikes forced 100.000+ escape
#Aleppo cs #Syria
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8V0x605iDg

Outlaw 09

Sat, 02/13/2016 - 3:35am

In reply to by Dayuhan

Dayuhan...this is exactly why your comments go often astray..the geo political goals for 70 years were two fold....oil and control of the naval routes in the Med into the Black Sea all backing up the US "containment of Soviet Union"....

BTW...seriously go back and analyze just how much oil was pumped and sold via US/EU oil companies out of the ME...then look at the levels of oil production inside the US.....you will strangely notice that the US literally hoarded it's oil/gas and it stayed in the ground until 20112-2016 when suddenly the US production outpaced KSA. That was this thing called strategic oil reverses and it counted those barrels of oil in the ground and not producing and areas of proven oil reserves that had not be tapped for production. Kind of a Cold War mindset out of the 50/60s.

Or did you miss those.

Secondly you as well as all of the DC area cannont even define what a "Syrian moderate" is to look like?.... why is that...simple as long as you debate what it is then you need not take action right?

After five years of genocide, gas attacks, torture, rape and starvation and mass refugees/IDP flows I challenge you define to me and the readers here..."What a Syrian moderate"???????

Does he pray to God, Allah or some other deity, does he wear a beard or is beardless, does he allow for "women's right's", does he support Sharia or the rule of law, is he for free elections, or does he believe in the Arab concept of tribal rulings...THIS list could go on forever...get it as long as we debate the "what is" we simply need not make a decision....simple...

Why not simply let the Syrians on their own regardless of religious and political views take on IS WHICH is the same goal as the US has with IS...then stand back and allow them to figure it out.....? Now that is not that hard is it?

Again who "triggered via unintended consequences" the Arab Spring with his Cario speech....Obama...no one else AND you failed to explain then why he then sat by when they broke out.

You also failed to mention that in that same speech he basically stated his support "for fundamentalist Muslims"...and what do we now have in the ME .....a whole bunch of "fundamentalists".

Now as an astute observer of the current Obama hands off ME FP....DO you honesty believe this statement from Kerry yesterday?

QUOTE:
John Kerry: Hezbollah militia and the Iraqi militias will be targeted in case they do not respect the ceasefire

NOTICE he did not mention the term "transnational shia jihadists" did he...

BTW he, Obama and the entire USAF will not bomb....why do I say that...BUT WAIT it is easy to figure out why not....there is absolutely no current US creditability any longer in the ME and or Ukraine.

Creditability comes when one backs up what they state and Kerry and Obama have been "talking for nearly eight years" and not a single action was taken.

If you were Putin "would you be worried about the Kerry threat..."?

Yawn.........

Dayuhan

Fri, 02/12/2016 - 10:21pm

In reply to by Outlaw 09

"the US did consider Syria and the bordering countries for over 70 years to be "critical to US interests in the ME"

Congratulations... you've just come up with the single worst reason I have ever heard for US engagement in Syria, and I've heard some really bad ones. What is that, the "argumentum ad inertia"?

What exactly are these supposed critical interests? They certainly aren't economic, and it's hard to see how they could be strategic. Of course chaos anywhere is not entirely in the interests of the US, the quintessential status quo power, but diving into the collapse of a nation in which the US has no clear goals and no viable allies is not compatible with US interests either.

Russia is not the Soviet Union and there is no Cold War 2.0; there is no need to reflexively counter everything Russia tries to do. Maybe, just maybe, the US is finally learning to choose its battles and resist commitment to theaters where it has no defined interests or clear, achievable policy goals.

The FSA has been repeatedly assessed as a potential ally and found wanting at every turn. We have seen this before: there is always some group that somebody wants to believe would be a nice cozy westernized ally if only we pour enough money in. It doesn't generally work out that way, and your personal infatuation with the FSA does not change that equation one bit.

Leadership is not only found in diving in. Sometimes leadership lies in knowing when to stay out... and given the lack of definable interests or goals in this picture, this seems a most excellent candidate for staying out.

The Arab Spring raised a lot of unrealistic hopes in a lot of places, Washington among them. Many overly optimistic things were said and dreamed in many quarters, but at the end of the day the Srab Spring represented the collapse of the long running autocracies that had held the region in stasis for decades. The cynical and the sensible knew from the start that the outcopme was going to be chaos, with multiple parties contending to fill the power vacuums left as the autocrats fall. Expecting the US to dictate the outcomes of these multiple overlapping struggles would be the height of folly.

Outlaw 09

Fri, 02/12/2016 - 2:31am

In reply to by Outlaw 09

BTW...Kerry was panicking in Munich if he could not get any form of any kind of agreement......why he and the Obama WH finally realized that the Turks and the Saudi's were not bluffing about moving into Syria...IMHO they are still going in.

AND you did notice that once challenged by the KSA/Turkey about actually going in under US leadership to finally tackle IS on the ground WHERE was the Obama WH response....missing in action is a kind term....BUT he is on record for fighting IS anywhere and all the time so why all of a sudden when he has Muslim troops willing to go in....he all but panics...?

Why because that would require him making a military decision that he does not want on his "legacy watch".

Actually Obama after almost eight years is fairly easy to read...Putin has his number and does want he wants to anytime and anywhere fully knowing Obama will never push back.

Sad really for the future US FP.

EXAMPLE:.....from yesterday in Munich....the comment is telling and is true.

“I can’t stop Putin. Can you say no to Putin?” Staffan de Mistura said, referring to the US and its allies.
http://wpo.st/36tA1

AND another perfect example...appears Russia will not stop bombing as per the UNSC three resolutions they signed....

Announced ceasefire in Syria said not to include Russian bombing. Sounds strange. Will others observe?
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-35556783

The cessation deal excludes #ISIL & Nusra but we all know how Russians, Assad and even Kurdish YPG call everyone in Syria ISIL or Nusra.

AND this is the final example of just how bad the US FP is......
What do Minsk and Munich have in common? Russians unilaterally setting the cease-fire terms to a conflict they're fighting in

AND there is no intertwining of eastern Ukraine and Syria...think again?

Outlaw 09

Fri, 02/12/2016 - 2:00am

In reply to by Dayuhan

Is it not interesting that we read and hear daily in the US media,western MSM and even from the Obama WH that we have no geo political reasons to be in Syria which somehow overlooked the fact that the US did consider Syria and the bordering countries for over 70 years to be "critical to US interests in the ME"....end of story.

Now ask yourself---- why the sudden change after 70 years....that this administration "suddenly discovers there is no interest"....always ask the question why and see what then comes...

Highly suggest rereading the wordy 6K word speech given by Obama in Cairo just one year into his administration in 2009.

If one reads thoroughly you will note a number of items that stick out now seven years later.

He had FOUR geo political goals stated in that speech;
1. the Israeli/Palestinian conflict to be settled
2. THIS is important as it is telling now for exactly his lack of actions in the ME
HE fully accepted fundamentalist Islam a subtle signal to the various groups that the US accepted them....his words not mine
4. THIRD critical point .....establish normal relations with Assad
4. FOURTH point......establish normal relations with Iran

NOW comes along the Arab Spring where the younger Arab generation read into that speech that there could be change in the countries that were under dictatorial rule and or had Islamic governments AND this is important and you so often overlook in your comments....THAT the US would accept the changes pushed by the Arab Springs.

NOW ask yourself....why was the US FP during the Arab Spring totally and absolutely "disjointed".....starting with Egypt.?

WHY...Obama was already on record for accepting fundamental Islamic groups and rulers...WHICH if you stretch the speech a little even accepts IS/AQ under that definition.

You are apparently not aware that in areas that the FSA controls there are over 700 self elected councils running their local areas AND surprise of surprises they were actually quite democratically elected even with women representation in those councils and they can wear the vail if they want to or not... their choice.....

Has it not been the US claiming that ME has needed the rule of law, transparency and good governance....and when it does appear in the middle of an open rebellion by a civil society that choose to rebel you and others seem to not have heard about it.

Great example...late yesterday in Munich with the hint of Munich 1938 in the air with "great fanfare" western MSM trumpets "break through in Syria...ceasefire in a week"..

Then if you had read the fine print...it was no breakthrough but simply the same exact results published in three UNSC resolutions, the Geneva meetings and Vienna meetings....AND Russia has already hedged by saying "well you know many different groups are fighting and we are not sure we can get them under our control...EXACTLY what they said after Minsk2....notice anything? AND really Russia gave nothing away as they were in theory based on their shaky words going to stop bombing on 1 March so they gave up "one week"....big deal.

AND they will continue to fight IS WHICH they have never done and JaN which is intermixed with FSA and other anti Assad forces...SO Russia can continue to bomb and the US accepted this.

Many here and you yourself often allude to the fact that IS has to be removed by the locals not the US...BUT when the locals are actually fighting daily IS THAT does not make the US MSM nor does DC even mention it.

It is amazing that the FSA is still fighting daily IS and dodging Russian, US and 10 other AF bombings and now being attacked by the Kurds...

We have boots on the ground that has in fact been fighting IS daily since 2012 but you will in the western MSM never read about that...why is that??

I will actually challenge you to define what a "Islamic moderate looks like and what he believes"....then define what is a secular Muslim, what is a Salafist and what is a Takfirist....

Then I will challenge you explain why many seem to have overlooked the "transnational Shia jihadist" who if you are really honest with yourself has killed almost as many US/foreign military personnel as was killed in 9/11.

BUT not even a whisper about them...ever wonder why?

Check the four geo political goals for Obama in the ME listed above.

THEN and this is the interesting point it almost matches the Putin geo political goals for the ME as he is placing his "faith" in the Shia fundamentalists not the Sunni.

There is no military solution that serves the interests of the US, because the US has no clear interests in place and no realistic, achievable goal to pursue. The Russians do have a clear interest and a clear goal, which makes the use of force a viable option for them. Just because it's a viable option for them doesn't mean it's a viable option for us, and there is no logic in trying to match their moves.

There is not and never was any outcome to this that serves US interests. Assad stays, we get a Russian-allied dictator who hates our guts. Assad falls, we get a power vacuum with the Iranians and the Saudis duking it out in a long-term proxy war. The idea that there was some moderate force that could roll out a nice shiny pro-western democracy if only they had US support is just a re-run of a long-standing American fantasy that brings nothing but trouble.

One of the great mysteries of this mess is the persistent notion that the US must be involved in every fight on the planet, and the strange delusion that reluctance to commit to a quagmire where we have no dog in the hunt, no natural ally, no national interest worth pursuing, and no realistic goal constitutes "lack of leadership". Lack of stupidity, maybe.

Outlaw 09

Thu, 02/11/2016 - 12:35am

As someone who has since the Crimea been extremely critical of Obama, Kerry and the entire NSC....I will repeat it again...this is the weakest absolutely the weakest President, DoS Sec and NSC in literally 70 years.

They are clinging to the idea that soft power will be the potential way forward for the US in the 21st century and THEY and their soft power beliefs have run smack into an individual who is determined to force his way to the top again.

This article is just another one in a long series of recent articles defending this administration AND their evidently lack of anything they can do stories.

Obama and Kerry talk and talk and talk and when their so called allies ie the Syrian opposition and Ukraine bulk because the US is pressuring them to commit unilateral appeasement moves without a single reciprocal move THEN they apply direct pressure ie blackmail and then when caught out state "we were misunderstood".....the problem is they were fully understood.

This article is extremely interesting as the US has right now five options that they could in effect make that shows their determination to truly achieve a ceasefire.

BUT there can be no diplomacy unless the other side fully understands you are ready to use force much as Putin is doing.

Herein lies the core problem for Obama and Kerry...they are fighting for a legacy that states....I did 8 years and did not get us into a war....

Obama and Kerry have together created in the eyes of Putin the image that they are afraid and will not use force regardless of how many times the US FP is shown to be a dismal failure.

Here in SWJ there have been a serious discussion of non linear warfare and the WH...absolutely nothing......

This article is nothing more nothing less that another series of CYA excuses...sad..sad.

Will remind everyone of Obama's exact words in reference to the Donbas.....

"we will judge Putin by his actions not by his words......"

So what has the WH/Kerry responses been......they have actually when one closely looks at their moves...actually adopted the Putin doctrine and are comfortable with that decision...pity the next President....