You are here

Russia now holds key to political settlement in Syria

Oct 27,2015 - Last updated at Oct 27,2015

Ever since Russia decided to intervene militarily in Syria it has become the main interlocutor in the conflict and the party that is primarily responsible for undertaking a political conclusion that is acceptable both regionally and internationally. The focus has shifted from Washington and its Western allies to Moscow, which is now trying to generate a political process that would go in parallel with its military operations in Syria. It goes without saying that Moscow’s direct intervention came as the Russians believed that the embattled regime of Bashar Assad was on the brink of collapse. Damascus had requested Russia’s help after surmising that neither Iran nor Hizbollah will be able to prevent a wholesale defeat.

President Vladimir Putin’s decision to double down in Syria was a calculated one. Assad’s fall would have led to the collapse of the Syrian army and state institutions, leading to chaos, geopolitical upsets and giving Daesh the upper hand there. The West and the regional parties that are backing various opposition groups inside Syria clearly had no day-after scenario. A repeat of what happened in Iraq, Libya and Yemen worried some of Syria’s neighbours, like Jordan, and others such as Egypt and the UAE. 

Moscow’s intervention has divided the anti-Assad bloc. The European position deviated over what role the Syrian president should have and whether he should preside over part of the transitional phase. Even the US is now looking into options that would allow Assad to stay on for a short period of time before his ultimate exit. On the other hand, Saudi Arabia, along with Turkey and Qatar, stuck to their position that the only acceptable formula for a political solution would be for Assad to depart now. All were critical of Russia’s military involvement and its consequences.

But after more than three weeks of Russian air strikes, which critics say targeted mainly the Syrian opposition and not Daesh, it became apparent that the demoralised Syrian army was unable to achieve breakthroughs in Homs, Aleppo, the Damascus countryside and Sahl Al Ghab. Few villages were retaken only to be abandoned some days later. Iranian advisers and Hizbollah fighters suffered heavy losses in the latest counteroffensives. Daesh and Al Nusra Front, once bitter enemies, are now considering joining forces to confront the “Russian aggression”. Clearly the military campaign is not going as Moscow had wished.

Assad’s surprise visit to Moscow last week raised questions about its real objectives. Yes, President Putin reiterated his support for the regime but he also talked about the need for a political process. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov called on his US counterpart, John Kerry, to work together to find a political solution in Syria. Putin was quick to brief the leaders of Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Jordan about Assad’s visit. 

While Russia continued with its air strikes in Syria, Moscow began to shift the focus from the military to the political. The four-way meeting in Vienna last Friday, which excluded many parties including France, laboured with one single point: the fate and role of Assad. The meeting may have been a failure, but clearly the various parties were homing in on possible compromises. Russia struggled with its position that the fate of Assad would be decided by the Syrian people. But a political process would ultimately decide that controversial point, Russian analysts argued.

Already some see Russia’s intervention in Syria as a political breakthrough for President Putin. The rewards go beyond Moscow’s increasing role in Syria. It has now closer ties with Iraq, Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the UAE; all close allies of the United States. Lavrov, who at one stage doubted the existence of the Free Syrian Army (FSA) is now ready to help the anti-Assad group in its fight against terrorism. Reports said that a proposal was put forward by Lavrov on Friday to freeze fighting between the pro-regime Syrian army and the FSA and hold early elections to determine a transitional government. 

A day later Assad was quoted as saying that he was willing to run in an early presidential election, hold parliamentary elections and discuss
constitutional changes, but only after the defeat of “terrorist” groups. This came after he was urged by Moscow to open dialogue with the moderate opposition.

Most parties remain in a state of denial. The Syrian National Coalition has condemned Russia’s military intervention and rejected calls for opening channels of communication with the regime. Turkey’s position may be swayed by internal challenges and growing fears of the creation of Syrian Kurdish enclave along its borders. Jordan’s main concern is to contain Daesh and protect its northern borders even if that meant a more durable role for Assad in the transitional phase.

Saudi Arabia’s position remains solid but things could change as a more expanded meeting on Syria is expected to take place at the end of the month. One thing is clear for now: Moscow is pushing for a political solution and the future of Assad is no longer off the table as long as the process guarantees the integrity of the Syrian state and its institutions. 

 

The writer is a journalist and political commentator based in Amman.

up
20 users have voted.


Newsletter

Get top stories and blog posts emailed to you each day.

PDF