Airstrikes on IS in Syria: Russia puts the US in a difficult position?

(Baonghean) - Since September 30, Russia has begun airstrikes against the self-proclaimed Islamic State (IS) in Syria. This event has attracted the attention of the international community, including the US and its Middle Eastern allies.

A Russian airstrike was carried out in Homs (Syria). Photo: Internet

Legal and unexpected

When assessing a country’s military action, its legality must first be considered. Russia argues that its airstrikes against IS in Syria are legal for three reasons: Syrian President Bashar al-Assad requested Russia’s participation in the fight against IS; in September 2014, the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution calling for countries to cooperate in destroying IS; and the Russian Parliament authorized military operations against IS on Syrian territory.

Russia's airstrikes on IS in Syria came as a surprise to the US and the international community. Of course, this is a strategy that the Kremlin has carefully calculated, at least since the US and its allies launched airstrikes on IS in Iraq and Syria in August 2014. Based on historical experience, President Putin decided to only launch airstrikes on IS, not send ground troops into Syria. There are four reasons why Mr. Putin chose to intervene militarily in Syria since September 30:

First, the P5+1 and Iran reached a nuclear agreement on July 14, which is both beneficial and challenging for Russia, especially as relations between Iran and the US and its Western allies gradually improve.

Second, 28 European countries – key US allies – are struggling with the refugee crisis. Moreover, the conflict in eastern Ukraine has temporarily subsided. Therefore, the EU is somewhat “distracted” towards Russia.

Third, after more than a year of airstrikes by the US and its allies, IS has not only not been destroyed but has also grown stronger in both Iraq and Syria. Until September 2015, although not publicly admitted, the US and its coalition's fight against IS in Iraq and Syria had not been successful, and the US's training and arming of the so-called "moderate opposition" against al-Assad had also been a complete failure.

This is an opportunity for Russia to show its strength, sending a message to the US and the international community: without Russia's participation, it will be impossible to resolve the Syrian conflict and defeat IS.

Fourth, since mid-2015, the al-Assad regime has weakened, IS has taken over more than half of the territory and put Damascus in a passive position. If IS overthrows al-Assad and dominates Syria, it will be an unpredictable disaster for the world, directly threatening Russia's security as nearly a third of IS commanders are Russians from Chechnya. Therefore, Russia must save al-Assad by airstrikes to destroy an important part of IS, helping Damascus regain the initiative on the battlefield, putting the US-backed opposition forces in a passive position.

Kremlin's intentions

Russia's real purpose in conducting airstrikes on IS in Syria is probably only known to Mr. Putin. Commentators speculate that it is primarily to save the al-Assad regime - Russia's only ally in the Middle East. If IS removes Mr. al-Assad and dominates Syria, it will directly threaten Russia's stability. If the US-backed opposition forces overthrow Bashar al-Assad, Russia will not only be left empty-handed in Syria, but in the entire Middle East. For many years, Syria has had a close relationship with Russia, below ally and above friend. If the al-Assad regime collapses, Russia will lose its foothold in the Middle East and its entire southwestern flank will be threatened.

Airstrikes by Russia (purple stars) and the US-led coalition (blue stars) between September 30 and October 5. Graphics: BBC. (Source: VNE)

In terms of long-term strategy, by airstrikes against IS and supporting the al-Assad regime, Russia wants to indirectly let the US and its allies understand that, like Iran's suspected nuclear program, the conflict in Syria, other hotspots in the Middle East, South Asia, and North Africa, will never be resolved without Russia's participation. That is, the US and the West can impose economic sanctions on Russia, but whether they like it or not, they still have to cooperate with Russia to solve major world issues and regional hotspots.

Another goal of Russia is to demonstrate to the international community through military operations that Russia is really fighting IS, fighting IS more effectively than the US and its US-led coalition, and that without destroying IS, removing the al-Assad regime is a serious mistake and will lead to a new spiral of violence that will sweep the entire Middle East. In other words, Russia's support for the al-Assad regime and cooperation with Damascus to destroy IS is the most reasonable option.

The ultimate goal is that the Kremlin wants to implicitly remind Kiev, Eastern Europe and the Baltic countries that the US has great interests in cooperating with Russia to solve important world problems, and that Washington will not easily confront the Kremlin for someone.

US and Allies' Response

When Russia began airstrikes against IS, the US was in a weak position. After more than 14 months, the US and its coalition have conducted more than 6,000 airstrikes in Iraq and Syria, but IS is getting stronger. The US campaign against IS is not effective.

In Syria, the US and its allies have two goals: to destroy IS and to support the “moderate opposition” to remove the al-Assad regime. To date, frankly speaking, both goals have not been achieved and are in a “dilemma”. However, the honor of a superpower does not allow Washington to give up in Syria.

In his speech at the 70th session of the United Nations General Assembly in late September 2015, President Putin proposed the formation of an international coalition against IS, including the al-Assad government, Iran, Iraq, Arab countries and other countries, in which Russia would play a leading role. Russia's proposal indirectly confirmed that the US-led anti-IS coalition was not working effectively. However, President Putin's proposal was in line with the UN Security Council Resolution, so even though he was not satisfied, President Obama could not reject it.

Washington has tried to deflect attention by accusing Moscow of not attacking IS but the anti-Assad opposition in Syria. A State Department spokesman said: “What we are concerned about is the impact that such military action (Russian airstrikes on IS) could have on Syria, as more than 90% of the strikes we have seen are not against IS or al-Qaeda affiliates. The main targets are opposition groups, groups that do not want to see the al-Assad regime survive.”

On October 8, the NATO Defense Ministers Meeting in Brussels decided to set up a missile defense system in Türkiye and increase NATO's rapid reaction force in Europe from 20,000 to 40,000 troops. This is an indirect warning to Russia's airstrikes against IS in Syria.

Possibility of US-Russia cooperation

So far, in the fight against IS and resolving the Syrian conflict, Russia has had an advantage over the US. Of course, cooperation with the US is still needed, so President Putin has proactively proposed that President Obama cooperate on these issues.

Recently, key US allies in Europe have shown signs of de-escalation with Russia on both Ukraine and Syria. Last week, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said that Bashar al-Assad could have a role in a transitional political solution in Syria. Elsewhere in Paris, Madrid, Rome, Athens... there is also acceptance of Mr. al-Assad playing a role in the transition period in Syria.

Russian missiles destroy a base believed to be an IS ammunition depot. Photo cut from video. (Source VNE)

Moving from firmly rejecting the Syrian president to acknowledging his role in a political solution is a major adjustment in the trend of compromising with Russia on the Syria and IS issues. In turn, the US must also cooperate with Russia in the fight against IS and resolving the conflict in Syria. But because the US is a superpower, Washington can only gradually de-escalate its cooperation with Russia to save face.

In fact, since Russia launched its airstrikes against IS, the US and Russia have been engaged in exchanges at all levels. On the sidelines of the 70th United Nations General Assembly, President Obama had a 90-minute meeting with President Putin, focusing on the fight against IS and the Syrian conflict. Secretary of State Kerry has met and spoken on the phone with Foreign Minister Lavrov many times. The US Joint Chiefs of Staff have also had many exchanges with the Russian Chief of General Staff to coordinate operations and avoid unnecessary collisions during airstrikes.

Thus, despite conflicts in goals, strategic interests and lack of trust in each other, the situation forces the US and Russia to continue to cooperate in the fight against IS and resolve the conflict in Syria.

Scenario for Syria

To date, international public opinion has made many different predictions about the fate of IS and the future of Syria. It should be noted that the fight against IS is closely related to the resolution of the conflict in Syria.

Contrary to some predictions, it is unlikely that Russia will get bogged down in Syria. The basis for this assessment lies in the fact that Russia's overall national strength, especially its economy, is far inferior to that of the United States. The Russian economy is in recession and cannot withstand prolonged military intervention in Syria. On the other hand, Putin's style is completely different from Obama's. After making in-depth strategic calculations, President Putin started the war by striking quickly and strongly, not allowing IS to defend and preserve its forces.

Thus, it can be predicted that thanks to the intelligence information collected by itself and provided by Syrian intelligence, Russia will conduct intensive airstrikes until the end of 2015, determined to push IS into a passive position. After that, Russia will occasionally conduct airstrikes to wear down IS forces and help the al-Assad government expand liberated areas.

Under those conditions, Russia and the US will compromise on a political solution to the Syrian conflict following the roadmap: ceasefire and prisoner exchange under the supervision of international peacekeeping forces; establishment of a provisional government for about a year led by Mr. al-Assad with the participation of opposition factions; the provisional government amends the Constitution and passes the Election Law; and holds a general election in Syria in late 2016, early 2017. Syrian officials must reconcile the interests of political factions, representing ethnic and religious communities in the country, while ensuring the interests of Russia and the US, taking into account the interests of Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, etc.

This is the most feasible scenario for resolving the conflict in Syria, but reality is always more complicated. The fight against IS and resolving the conflict in Syria are also influenced by many other factors, some of which have not yet emerged. Therefore, the international community needs to closely monitor to assess and judge realistically.

Associate Professor, Doctor, Major General

Le Van Cuong

(Former Director of the Institute of Strategy and Science, Ministry of Public Security)