How to work with Russia in Syria ("Foreign Affairs", USA)

How to work with Russia in Syria ("Foreign Affairs", USA)



What could be cooperation

It is difficult to wage war when your allies cannot agree on who the enemy is. This is exactly the situation the United States has encountered in Syria. Washington is trying to persuade allies from the Persian Gulf, who want to fight the Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad, but not radical Islamists, in an attempt to create a coalition to fight. He has to deal with Turkey, which opposes Assad and radical Islamists, but wants to fight mainly with the Kurds. Another US ally, Israel, is hesitantly looking at the swirling maelstrom of its enemies and, it seems, is ready to intervene only if serious threats arise. Finally, Germany wants to arm the Kurds, and American special forces are already interacting with them. In all this confusion, it is not surprising that the results of the struggle with the self-proclaimed “Islamic State” (ISIL) of the coalition today are very disappointing.

And here Russia comes into play with a small coalition and decisive goals. Russian President Vladimir Putin is determined to regain the influence and prestige of his country in the Middle East. In Syria, Russia is acting to save its last Arab friend, Assad, so that a radical Sunni government or (less likely) a pro-American government composed of opposition members currently in exile does not come to power. After Syria, Russia looks at Iraq, where American prestige has fallen due to the fact that ISIL quite successfully keeps the occupied territories. Iraq for Russia may be the biggest trophy, because there 150 billions of barrels of oil and vivid memories of the failed American intervention.

In the Middle East, Russia has several advantages. Firstly, there she has not very conflicting interests. For comparison, American politicians face an impossible task, because they have to please many key allies, whose demands are often contradictory and mutually exclusive to each other - Israelis, Saudis, Qatari, Turks and Iraqis. On the side of Russia are two countries - Iran and Syria, and both of them fully approve of its presence in the region. The third partner, Iraq, is also rapidly moving to its side.

And then there are widespread views. Many in this region believe that there is no good from the United States, and the United States doesn’t do much to convince them otherwise. Meanwhile, Russia's promise to use all its power for a quick solution of the problem quite naturally seems attractive to those whose lives are under threat throughout the crisis.

The United States has a choice, albeit a poor one. They may demand that Russia stop its campaign, but this will only play into the hands of those who spread rumors that the United States is not really interested in destroying ISIS. This will allow Russia to act alone. But if the Russians succeed in stabilizing the situation in Syria and Iraq without the United States, to which they seem determined, this will be a powerful blow to the American state.

Further, Russian intervention against all rebel groups could initiate a new wave of jihadism, which would harm all interested parties. The United States can follow the example of Turkey and the Gulf countries that want to increase support for the rebels. But by doing so, America will be at one with the radicals, which after the end of the conflict will be impossible to control. But if the United States joins the antiterrorist coalition in the Putin version, they will, in effect, support the man (Assad), who is accused of dictatorship and of destroying the civilian population.

There is another option: the United States and Europe can reject all calls to add fuel to the fire. Instead, they can join forces with Russia, Iran and Turkey to stop the supply. weapons to Syria.

The games are over.

The common goal for the West and Russia at the final stage of the struggle may be a federal structure in which non-Salafi Sunni rebel forces, Kurds and Alawites will coexist peacefully. To achieve this goal, all parties must cooperate in the fight against ISIL and other radical elements, while at the same time striving for a ceasefire between Assad and the rebels from outside the Salafi camp. In order to attract Assad to this interaction, Russia must give guarantees of protection and undertake to revise the Syrian electoral law from 2011, the law on local elections and the new edition of article 8 of the country's constitution from 1973. This section states that the Syrian Baath Party is the only leading party in Syria. And although Assad will certainly be against change, he (under pressure) may agree to hold free and fair elections in new autonomous regions. Prior to that, he must agree to a referendum on the federal structure of Syria and the disputed territories.

In this scenario, Assad will be able to bow out and save his reputation during transparent elections. Such an outcome may seem unacceptable to many, but there is no alternative. If Assad loses power in some other way, the Salafi militants will strengthen and expand their positions, and the Alawites, Druze and Christians will be expelled and exterminated, as will moderate Sunnis. And if Assad does not leave, the war will last forever.

Of course, the transition period with elections can begin without further negotiations on a sustainable cease-fire, not to mention the work of international observers. But such a situation in reality can only be created by Russia and the United States - if they act together.

Syria owed Russia several billion dollars. The United States may ask Putin to use the promise of debt relief to rescue the devastated Syrian economy as a lever of pressure on Assad to re-turn to a political decision. Russia can agree to this. In the end, otherwise, she and her allies will have to support the Syrian army and government, which in essence has failed, indefinitely. The Russian economy was marked by a recession, and a long war in Syria could be unacceptable for Putin.

In turn, the United States and the European Union can link support for the transition period in Syria with a relief of the sanctions regime against Russia. They can also offer their partner Turkey to put pressure on Russia, showing it the feasibility of a negotiated solution. In the next five years, Turkey intends to increase trade with Russia from 32 to 100 billions of dollars. These countries also intend to build the Turkish Stream gas pipeline with an 60 capacity of billions of cubic meters of gas per year in order to supply gas to the European market. The US and the EU can sweeten the agreement for Ankara by returning the Patriot missiles to Turkey, which were supposedly withdrawn from there for repair and modernization, and because Asad lost the northern part of Syria, the range of the Syrian air forces decreased. Now, when Russian planes are flying in the Syrian sky, Turkey is again nervous. She needs additional security guarantees, but they should be given as part of a mutual agreement.

The European Union must also do its bit and reduce Russia's concern that Syria could become a breeding ground for the seasoned Chechen militants who belong to such groups as Jaish al-Muhajirin, which could launch attacks against former Soviet states. To do this, European countries should make it clear to Ankara that attacks on Kurds and the refusal to stop financial flows and supply of weapons to the Jaish al-Fatah group (which includes Chechen militants) may adversely affect Turkey’s accession to the EU and the provision of Turkish billions of dollars in aid. Of course, Chechen fighters also join the ranks of ISIS, but the cessation of external support to all the radicals in Syria is only one important component of the overall strategy to reduce their combat capability and reduce the sphere of influence that could reach Moscow, Ankara and Washington.

When all parties agree to negotiations, they can get together in Moscow, which will be in line with Russia's desire to play a leading role in this region. Negotiations could lead the rebels and the government to enter into a direct discussion, which was not achieved in Geneva. To this end, Turkey can guarantee the continuation of financial support to the remaining non-Salafi opposition members, provided that they refuse to cooperate with Jabhat al-Nusra and undertake a formal obligation to protect minorities. In turn, Russia must inform Assad of the need for direct negotiations, because Putin cannot allow Syria to become a bottomless barrel, where it will have to endlessly pour in financial and military aid.

For the duration of the talks and the transition period, the Syrian army and the rebels will not be allowed to retain their weapons, but only to protect the local population from ISIL and other terrorists. A contingent of observers will be sent to Syria to control this process. Meanwhile, fighting on the battlefield shoulder to shoulder with both sides of the coalition will be allowed only to those nongovernmental forces that fight with the Salafis - that is, the YPG forces of 25 000 people, as well as the government troops and the rebels, who maintain their static defense areas. Since the role of YPG causes a lot of controversy, the movements of these units will have to be coordinated with the Turks. Ultimately, the removal of Salafi militants from the general brawl will be the key to ensuring lasting peace in the region.

New Syria will have to become a federative country. This is even recognized by Assad: he made it clear that he had abandoned the idea of ​​liberating certain areas from the rebels. In the Alawite Autonomous Region, Russia will retain Tartus. She will be responsible for the protection of Christian minorities and their former allies. The countries of the Persian Gulf and Turkey will continue to control their security zones, providing financial assistance and highlighting peacekeepers.

In the Sunni areas, international assistance will be aimed at depriving the Salafi of support and enabling the Russians and the Western coalition to fight against ISIL. Of course, help will not force the fanatic to lay down their arms, but if you support politicians participating in the peace process, it will be possible to prevent the recruitment process into the Salafi ranks. Sophisticated help will require special control, as there will be a lot of opportunities for waste and theft.

In the meantime, Kurdish troops will play the role of the ground forces. They will cut off Raqqa in Syria and stifle ISIS, while forces supported by Russia and the United States in Iraq will continue to fight from their side of the border. Kurdish troops remain neutral with respect to Assad (although they note that over time he should peacefully give up power), and also maintain good relations with Russians, Americans and non-Salafi elements in the ranks of Syrian rebels.

To begin negotiations under such a plan, Moscow has already hosted rebel leaders, leaders of Kurds and Iranians. But its ties with the states of the Persian Gulf are limited. It goes without saying that the West will have to use its leverage on Saudi Arabia to stop supporting Sunni radicals. In fact, the United States has already demonstrated in 2008 its willingness and ability to exert diplomatic pressure on the Saudis, who have limited support for Salafis in Iraq.

There is also the question of who will pay for the post-war reconstruction of the country. According to the UN, the Syrian economy will need to recover at least 30 years. Russia and the United States will have to lead an international donor conference that will discuss the revitalization of Syria. It should be conducted in the image and likeness of the Madrid Conference on the Reconstruction of Iraq, which took place in 2003 year. Then managed to collect 33 billion dollars in the form of grants and loans. This is only a small fraction of what is needed for the restoration of Syria, but this is at least some beginning. Russian-American cooperation in the framework of this project will also mark the beginning of a new era of soft power, influencing potential allies.

Times change

Can such a tangled web of diplomatic pressure produce results? Perhaps the era of peaceful rivalry between the United States and Russia for their influence on Afghanistan, which lasted until the end of 1950, gives a hint at what can be achieved by using aid for the purchase of agricultural equipment, for digging irrigation canals, for building plants, and not for acquiring anti-tank missiles and Kalashnikov assault rifles. At the same time, the absence of free and fair elections in Afghanistan provides us with an edifying lesson about how quickly all this can turn into nothing.

The past shows us how quickly times change. In 2009, when US President Barack Obama launched a diplomatic campaign of rapprochement with Syria, Assad said: “We will be happy to welcome him to Syria, definitely. I say this in no uncertain terms. ” Obama, in response, highlighted the problematic issues, but expressed hope for future cooperation. In the same year, former Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki accused Assad of harboring terrorists who had recently struck Baghdad. Today, Iraq has essentially become a new ally of Syria. But in the year 2009 in Iraq there was no ISIS, but there was only a weakening Al-Qaeda. Seeing how quickly times change, we must remember that in the Middle East nothing can be ruled out.

One thing is certain. Only big players can achieve change in this crisis. The end result will not appeal to everyone; Attempts to create super-coalitions from dozens of countries for endless negotiations will lead the situation to an even bigger dead end. Worse yet, rival coalitions will invest their strength and resources in conflicting goals.

It is time for the US and Russia to start working together to stop the flow of deadly weapons flowing into the Syrian hell, and to remove from the battlefields in Iraq and Syria those who have never entered into negotiations with anyone. In this way, they will clear the way for a peaceful transition, and perhaps give Syria a better future.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

32 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. yuriy55 25 October 2015 07: 11 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    We must work honestly with Russia, on time taking the right side, gentlemen! And you will be happy ... soldier
    1. oleg-gr 25 October 2015 07: 59 New
      • 12
      • 0
      +12
      The interests of the Russian Federation and the USA are directly opposite. They will not agree or the Americans will pretend that they are fulfilling the agreements. They have been demonstrating this for a long time in relation to other treaties.
      1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Geisenberg 25 October 2015 08: 51 New
      • 7
      • 0
      +7
      Quote: yuriy55
      We must work honestly with Russia, on time taking the right side, gentlemen! And you will be happy ... soldier


      Why only with Russia? We must be honest with everyone.
      1. SSR
        SSR 25 October 2015 11: 27 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: Geisenberg
        Quote: yuriy55
        We must work honestly with Russia, on time taking the right side, gentlemen! And you will be happy ... soldier


        Why only with Russia? We must be honest with everyone.

        They just forgot how to be honest, they are honest with themselves in that case - when they suffer losses. When extracting the profits Their honesty (more precisely, it simply atrophied over the 6th century as a vestige) straight from the ears rushing))))


        A common goal for the West and Russia at the final the stage of the struggle may become a federal device, in which will coexist peacefully with non-Salafis Sunni rebel forces, Kurds and Alawites


        For some reason, when discussing the Ruins, the word Federated by them was specifically denigrated.
        1. Ajent cho 25 October 2015 11: 42 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          For some reason, when discussing the Ruins, the word Federated by them was specifically denigrated.
          Benefit. Benefit. It is not for nothing that the GDP from time to time raises the question of our mentalities and internal differences: Westerners are driven by thirst for profit and pragmatism, and we are driven by the concepts of justice. And here, I think, we have an advantage, because we can understand their logic, but they are ours - no.
      2. Nyrobsky 25 October 2015 11: 30 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: Geisenberg
        Why only with Russia? We must be honest with everyone.

        Alas, this is not possible for understanding mattresses. They have made lies their policies throughout the history of the United States.

        If you quote the words of Iron Chancellor Otto von Bissmark more precisely - "You need to play with the Russians honestly, or not play at all."
      3. Are
        Are 25 October 2015 13: 31 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        It came to pass that Russia could be blown up for "disrespectfulness" and "not honesty" .. good
    3. GSH-18 26 October 2015 18: 05 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Assad will certainly be against change, he (under pressure) may agree to hold free and fair elections in new autonomous regions. Before that, he must agree to a referendum on the federal structure of Syria and disputed territories.

      Putin has already answered a similar question about dividing Syria into parts of Russia categorically against such a scenario. Syria must remain whole and indivisible.
  2. slizhov 25 October 2015 07: 12 New
    • 10
    • 0
    +10
    Well vooot ... - "THE SYRIAN ISLAMISTS REFUSED TO FIGHT WITH ISIS"!
    That's all looming ... THE MODERATE OPPOSITION IS READY TO FIGHT ONLY AGAINST THEIR COUNTRY AND MANAGEMENT!
    Putin stole maaaaskiyii from all ... :)
    1. Sid.74 25 October 2015 07: 21 New
      • 9
      • 0
      +9
      Quote: slizhov
      Well vooot ... - "THE SYRIAN ISLAMISTS REFUSED TO FIGHT WITH ISIS"!

      Against the IG? Yes, you are joking, the IG itself is now an opposition group, this is according to the leading CNN channel. what

      One CNN report says that Russian aviation "... inflicts airstrikes on opposition groups, including the Islamic State."http://politrussia.com/news/zhurnalist-cnn-nazval-433/
      1. ZU-23 25 October 2015 08: 00 New
        • 7
        • 0
        +7
        In general, all these conversations are so-so, our business is to continue to help Syria hammer the igil, and Assad after the victory, on the contrary, will have weight inside Syria. Yesterday, the Syrian opposition refused to Moscow in a joint struggle against the igil, so that mattresses will continue to arm thugs through them, such an opposition has no chance in fair elections.
        1. Penetrator 25 October 2015 08: 37 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: ZU-23
          such an opposition has no chance of fair elections.

          Is this why there is no chance? Or do you think that Assad has one hundred percent support from all Syrian citizens? Whatever the case, for example, in the first year of the conflict, more than 20 thousand soldiers and a large number of officers and generals, who, at first, became the basis of armed resistance, deserted from the army, which is the main support of the regime. There, even the first Syrian astronaut, Mohammed Faris, went over to the side of the opponents of the president. So in the "fair elections" the democratic (in quotation marks) opposition will find its voter.
          It remains only to convince them of the futility of a violent solution to the political crisis. And how can you convince them when they believed in the Assad must leave mantra, in which the interested foreign states indulge them in every possible way?
          1. ZU-23 25 October 2015 09: 09 New
            • 8
            • 0
            +8
            Quote: Penetrator
            Is this why there is no chance? Or do you think that Assad has one hundred percent support from all Syrian citizens?
            20 thousand escaped, 10 thousand changed their minds, many died, many terrorists, etc. Assad now has an army of about 200 thousand with families and relatives who have not been dumped into Europe, and when he cleans the country of igils with our help, the rating there is off scale for all 70%, especially since the opposition is not going to clean the country of igil.
          2. The comment was deleted.
          3. sssla 25 October 2015 09: 16 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: Penetrator
            for example, in the first year of the conflict, more than 20 thousand soldiers and a large number of officers and generals, who, at first, became the basis of armed resistance, deserted from the army, which is the main support of the regime. There, even the first Syrian astronaut, Mohammed Faris, went over to the side of the opponents of the president.

            )))))) It will be in every country in the case as they say Mattresses "Something went wrong" and Russia is no exception !!!
        2. afdjhbn67 25 October 2015 09: 46 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: ZU-23
          such an opposition has no chance of fair elections.

          Fair elections in the East .. and even after the civil war ?? wassat
          Still reading bedtime stories ?? laughing
          1. ZU-23 25 October 2015 12: 40 New
            • -1
            • 0
            -1
            Quote: afdjhbn67
            Fair elections in the East .. and even after the civil war ?? Still reading bedtime stories ??

            We there are more honest elections than we will do in Ukraine, the same as in the Crimea. Some other kind of badass Che writes, well, such laziness to answer laughing
          2. The comment was deleted.
      2. The comment was deleted.
  3. svp67 25 October 2015 07: 16 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    How to work with Russia in Syria ("Foreign Affairs", USA)
    How? as? - Polite and neat, without sharp "gestures", at the maximum range of the Russian weapon systems and closer no-no ...
  4. Darkoff
    Darkoff 25 October 2015 07: 23 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    [Quote] The United States can follow the lead of Turkey and the Gulf countries, which want to increase support for the rebels. But in doing so, America will be at one with the radicals, which after the end of the conflict will be impossible to control. [Quote]
    Well here! They made the right conclusion! Then everything is simple: no radicals need to be supported. Just do not meddle, do not interfere!
    All difficulties are caused by situational and ill-conceived policies of the states without analysis of the consequences. Over the years of hegemony, they have completely relaxed and stupefied. For the first time in 20 years, they are forced to make decisions deliberately. By that, a competitor has appeared.
  5. PlotnikoffDD 25 October 2015 07: 29 New
    • 7
    • 0
    +7
    States do not need partners; states need sixes.
    1. Mikhail3 25 October 2015 16: 09 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: PlotnikoffDD
      States do not need partners; states need sixes.

      That’s the truth, the truth. And to unite with them in a coalition is insanity. Putin is anyone, just not a fool, so the United States in vain hopes that he will slip into the dregs they raised.
  6. Rurikovich 25 October 2015 08: 13 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    It seems you read, so everything, in principle, is very clearly laid out on shelves. what
    Now you just need to prioritize, identify the sequence of steps in order to realize in reality what can save the country. That's just the question of the participation in this party of those who consider themselves an exclusive nation. For it would be time to go down to earth and really look at certain things, and not to soar in the clouds over the invented pink world of its exclusivity lol
    Then it will be possible to talk about some success repeat
    In the meantime, I personally am for everything to work out for Russia !!! good soldier hi
  7. Mercury 25 October 2015 08: 25 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    The states need oil and gas and don't give a damn about who they’re friends with there. They don’t have any sympathy or kindred spirit. So they needed to build a pipeline from the Arabian Peninsula through Syria to Europe, which is more of cheap oil in Iraq and now they say they started planning pump Turkmen carbohydrates by stretching a pipe through Afghanistan.
    They also need more controlled chaos in the region and I have no doubt that Iraqi oil and Libyan oil go to the United States or Britain. Everything seems to be simple, and many of them confirm why to build illusions that the United States wants peace in Syria, Iraq or Afghanistan.
    And Russia, with its resources in the West, is the main goal and over time it will be increasingly fierce to try to destroy Russia
    1. Kos_kalinki9 25 October 2015 09: 45 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: Mercury
      The states need oil and gas and do not give a damn about who they are friends with. They needed to build a pipeline from the Arabian Peninsula through Syria to Europe, and now they say they began to plan to pump Turkmen carbohydrates by stretching the pipe through Afghanistan.

      Well, with Afghanistan it’s not so smooth. Googled. Mattresses with Turkmenistan seem to be worn with this idea since 2010. Only the Taliban movement somehow does not fit into this oil painting. Well, no way.
  8. Mainbeam 25 October 2015 08: 34 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    The public’s understanding of the interests of the Yankos in the Middle East comes.
    It is interesting that the "Americans" themselves began to write truthfully and reasonably about this.

    "Foreign Affairs", USA
    Posted by Luay Al Khatteeb, Abbas Kadhim


    1. Sid.74 25 October 2015 10: 09 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: MainBeam
      The public’s understanding of the interests of the Yankos in the Middle East comes.

      The video is just super!good Only ZDF really knows about the existence of the VO, which, even with fright, blocked the reproduction of its content on the site?
      Freedom of speech in German, such "freedom of speech"!bully
  9. Andrey NM 25 October 2015 09: 20 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    About the Mistals. That's how much we are talking about the futility of this type of ship for us, money thrown away and spent nerves ... But how much could they deliver goods and weapons to Syria? And do not drive one hundred times our BDK. Still, you need to do something similar of your own, taking into account errors and our features.
  10. plotnikov561956 25 October 2015 09: 24 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    The article seems to be correct ... But from their bell tower ... Russia is good ... but America, they say, are also wonderful with the Allies ... in a word, completely ignoring the RUSSIAN MENTALITY ...
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Kos_kalinki9 25 October 2015 10: 16 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: plotnikov561956
      The article seems to be correct ... But from their bell tower ... Russia is good ... but America, they say, are also wonderful with the Allies ... in a word, completely ignoring the RUSSIAN MENTALITY ...

      Posted by Luay Al Khatteeb, Abbas Kadhim
      Original source https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/syria/2015-10-18/how-work-russia-syria

      What is the Russian mentality here?
  11. Tusv 25 October 2015 09: 24 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Thanks to the authors. Chewed up the situation. Now it remains for Obama to put it in his mouth. A good way out of more than a delicate situation was offered to the Americans
    1. alexng 25 October 2015 09: 50 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      No one will be connected with this world liar in the person of fascistton. If before they slipped a few grams of truth to their lies, now they are a complete lie. So for this reason they are doomed to disappear from the world map as an integral state - a bunch of scum in the upper layers of this historical misunderstanding. If 20% of the world economies abandons the dollar (everything is ready for this ...), then the USA will fly to smithereens. These "exceptional" with mental disabilities are non-negotiable. If only those stubborn in revenge did not unleash a world fire once again, but I think that they have already been covered with red flags in this matter, otherwise the operation of the Russian Aerospace Forces would not have begun in Syria. Somewhere like that ...
  12. Andryukha G 25 October 2015 09: 25 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    How to work with Russia - just do not interfere and do not yelp in the media when it once again takes away the fruits of the "American bullshit" from the territory of the tormented 4-year war.
  13. CAMS 25 October 2015 09: 39 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    in Syria, the Americans will do everything as the Ukrainians taught, create visibility, waggle and put sticks in the wheels. but I hope Volodya will do as in Chechnya, grind militants and build statehood
  14. Mountain shooter 25 October 2015 10: 10 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Well, they are insulted! They democratized, tried, and the Russian bear came and broke all plans. Well, why is this? A terrible infernal funnel that is just beginning to unwind on the territory of "Square", the Endless War in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan. Fight in Syria. Someone serious had to come, and say - what have you done, brainless hegemons? Well, scat!
  15. NordUral 25 October 2015 11: 54 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    It’s very easy to leave in English. And do not arm the bandits, stop financing.
  16. Awaz 25 October 2015 12: 21 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    whatever the Big politicians would come up with, but Syria (that is, Assad) would have to think a little with his head. Russia would also need to prompt him some points. Of course, I myself do not know all the subtleties of the topic, but with a little thought in my brain, I came to the conclusion that Assad is doing a little wrong. It was necessary to carry out a campaign of intimidation against those who are called the "opposition", but all the forces would have to be thrown precisely to ISIS and to conquer the oil rigs. If it were possible to really take control of the desert territories and control the oil industry, it would be a decent victory and the possibility of pressure already on bandits from the "opposition" from a completely different height. The territories where the "oppositionists" have settled still partially support these oppositionists, and although the gangs are poorly armed and coordinated, fanaticism allows them to hold on, and external assistance. Having poorly dispersed the igil and Russia would have had some trump cards in pressure on Assad’s opponents. Therefore, some points could have been resolved without war.
    1. Sid.74 25 October 2015 15: 59 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: AwaZ
      It was necessary to hold a campaign of intimidation on those who are called the "opposition"

      You will not believe it, but the majority of opposition parties and associations are now in Damascus, and quite legally, even with Basher they go to one mosque to pray, but there is one nuance.
      These are statesmen and politicians, they do not oppose Assad with weapons.
      What in the West is called "opposition", in fact, is not opposition, the IG is the Doha project, and Alkayda, that is, En-Nusra is a CA project, and all of them are ordinary repeat offenders and gangsters from all over the Middle East, Central Asia, the Caucasus and North African.
      Quote: AwaZ
      all the forces would have to throw it on LIH and the reconquest of oil derricks.

      Why? It is enough to block the routes and the border with Turkey, they don’t transport this oil by air.
      Quote: AwaZ
      it would be a decent victory and the possibility of pressure already on the bandits from the "opposition"
      These conversations with the opposition are only a formal pretext; Putin helps the West to save a little face before the plebs.
      In fact, there is no one to talk with. The representatives of the "opposition" in all negotiations have no armed formations behind them. There is no one behind them, neither the people, nor the soldiers, nor the commanders of the armed formations, they are Doha and S.A. they say the same thing, in all negotiations with the Syrian government, Assad must leave. Here and all the negotiations with the opposition. All moderate formations went over to Assad, another year ago 1,5 went back, some were disarmed, others joined the militia, and others became together with the forces ATS patrol territory .
      Quote: AwaZ
      The territories where the "oppositionists" settled still partially support these oppositionists
      Only on pain of destruction.
  17. vit357 25 October 2015 21: 09 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    "he (under pressure) may agree to hold free and fair elections"
    I’m embarrassed to ask: is a free and fair election when the pro-American government comes to power, even if the people vote for Assad?
  18. sanyavolhv 26 October 2015 23: 24 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    health
    how confusing it is. and what is such confusion on the hand of Russia? NO!
    everything can be much simpler, America goes through the forest, ancient Persians understand that they can lose or win, decide with whom they are. Arabs understand that they, as “children,” are not yet ripe for their state. Turks understand that they don’t have much to catch without the help of China and Russia. The European Union understands that without the help of Russia and China, they will remain a slave to America. America sits exactly on the ass and listens to the opinions of others. following the instructions of the old world.
    Of course, understanding does not mean agreeing. but we know that rockets and money miraculously create. Well, if a sniper rifle says its word anyway .... there are umbrellas with patyphon needles ... a couple of the old world to get rid of new "they are children", to come to ancient consensus.
    Well, Russia should understand that she is a judge in this world, even when she wants to be just one of the countries.
    ps Yes, I forgot to clarify, the judge is not the executioner. but if the executioner is not able to carry out the orders ....