28 March 2024

Thursday, 15:30

FINISH LINE

Peace process in Syria has a real chance despite the difficulties of regional geopolitical situation

Author:

15.11.2017

Supported by the Russian Aerospace Forces, the Syrian government forces liberated the city of Abu Kamal, the last outpost of Islamic State (IS) terrorists. This is yet another remarkable event in the Syrian war, which will determine the future of the region engulfed by longstanding conflicts.

 

A radical change and obvious contradictions

Currently, the Syrian army is demining Abu Kamal located on the border with Iraq. "Some of the terrorists were killed, some crossed the Euphrates and move in the northern direction. I hope they will be met with all due respect", noted ironically the Russian Minister of Defense, Sergey Shoigu.

A radical change occurred in the Syrian war in the last two months. Government troops broke through the three-year blockade and completely liberated the province of Deir ez-Zor, and took control over one of the main strongholds of IS, the city of Mejadin. This success also shows military successes of Russia in the Syrian campaign ongoing for the last two years. Thanks to Russian support, government forces have regained control of 50% of the Syrian territory. IS controls only 5% of the territory now.

The situation of the terrorist group, which almost a year ago held under its control a number of areas of Syria and Iraq, has indeed worsened. It seems it will get even worse after the Iraqi army's offensive on the last stronghold of IS on the city of Ravu near the Syrian border.

Nevertheless, one cannot rule out the unexpected development of military-political configuration in Syria and Iraq. This is possible given the unresolved contradictions between the main regional actors, the U.S. and Russia, which have the greatest impact on the development of the situation in this region. Thus, the expert community assumes that the U.S., which do not reconcile Russia's military successes in Syria that strengthened the power of Syrian President Bashar Assad prematurely announced illegitimate by the White House, will take measures to change the current trend of the war. The U.S. will use the allies among the armed Syrian opposition to maintain a strategic section on the Iraqi-Syrian border from Abu Kamal to At-Tanf under its control. Apparently, Americans plan to transfer control over the Iraq-Syrian border in Abu Kamal region to Kurdish forces from the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). Accordingly, this may lead to a struggle to outstrip the opponent and raise a reasonable question: who will be the first to stake his influence on the strategically important sector of the Iraqi-Syrian border -the Kurds supported by Americans or the Syrian troops supported by Russians?

One may recall that earlier this year, during the battle for Raqqa, which for a long time was the capital of IS, the U.S. has helped its Kurdish allies. They managed to seize the Tishrin dam on the Euphrates and ensure their military and political superiority in the northeast of Syria. So, Washington may well use the same trick in the southeast of the country to prevent the final military triumph of Russia, which materialized after the liberation of Abu Kamal.

Meanwhile, American support of the Kurds, especially the obvious military support, may further deteriorate Washington's relations with Ankara. Turkey considers the groups of Syrian Kurds to be terrorist and closely connected with the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) and directly threatening the security and territorial integrity of Turkey. Political cooperation between Russia and the Kurdish forces can also lead to the growth of contradictions on Syrian issues, which primarily involves Turkish interests. In fact, Russia had to postpone the meeting scheduled for November 18 in Sochi on the Syrian settlement precisely because of Ankara's objections, which was dissatisfied with an invitation to the group of Syrian Kurds.

 

Chemical discord

Syrian confrontation between the leading powers also involves the United Nations, which is still dealing with a controversial question of whether or not the Assad government used chemical weapons in the course of military operations. The U.S. and Russia proposed alternative draft resolutions on the extension of the joint commission of inquiry (consisting of UN staff and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons - OPCW) after the expiration of its mandate on November 16.

Washington approves of the work of the commission, which concluded that the Syrian government forces used chemical weapons against militants and civilians, and proposes to extend its mandate for two years. The Russian side criticizes the commission's work for one-sidedness and bias, advocating the extension of its mandate for only six months, inviting investigators to conduct repeated examinations, and include materials from the Syrian government in their reports. The latter, as is known, categorically denies the use of chemical weapons and accuses terrorists of using banned substances.

Obviously, such serious contradictions contribute to skepticism as to whether it will be possible for the interested parties to ensure the long-awaited peace and consent in Syria. Washington and Moscow see the approaches and methods of long-term settlement of the Syrian conflict differently. Both are well aware that the real reason of confrontation behind a possible presidency of Bashar al-Assad is the prospect of some kind of great-power hegemony in the Middle East. But the U.S. and Russia seem to find a common interest at least on one important issue: IS must cease to exist. This message was explicitly revealed in the joint statement on Syria, adopted by the U.S. and Russian presidents at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Danang, Vietnam.

 

A Message from Putin and Trump

"It is absolutely obvious that the military efforts to liquidate the terrorist hotbed in Syria are nearing completion," said President Putin at the final press conference in Danang. He believes that "the crucial thing now is to finish that work and to strengthen de-escalation zone agreements, to enhance the ceasefire regime and create conditions for launching political dialogue," which, after the completion of the military phase of operation, must be conducted under the aegis of the United Nations.

Apparently, President Trump agrees with this approach, which made it possible to agree on a joint Russian-American statement on Syria. The document notes the successes of Russian and American military, which in recent months significantly reduced the number of IS terrorists. The heads of state agreed to support the efforts aimed at the final rout of the grouping, as well as the existing military channels to prevent incidents between the U.S. and Russian military.

There is another crucial point in the statement: both presidents confirmed their commitment to respect the sovereignty, territorial integrity and secularity of Syria. The latter aspect practically leaves no chance for ideological, political and information manipulation regarding the possibility of establishing any form of a clerical state in Syria. The document also calls on the UN member states to increase their contribution to meeting the humanitarian needs of Syria in the coming months.

Thus, the peace process in Syria has a real chance for implementation despite the difficulties of regional geopolitical situation. This may be reflected both in the long-awaited breakthrough in the Geneva negotiation process and in further progress of the process initiated in Astana, in which Russia, Iran and Turkey act as guarantors of ceasefire between the Syrian forces.



RECOMMEND:

385