Thursday

11th Aug 2022

Opinion

Syria: The ultimate example of cynical realpolitik

  • Reuters reports that IS is forcing children to be suicide bombers (Photo: a.anis)

With the roar of conflict in eastern Ukraine, some disquieting developments in the Middle East might have been recently overlooked.

Yet, interviews by Syrian president Bashar al-Assad and Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan, a meeting of Syrian “opponents” in Moscow, and rumours inside the Washington Beltway add up to little hope for the Syrian quagmire.

Read and decide

Join EUobserver today

Become an expert on Europe

Get instant access to all articles — and 20 years of archives. 14-day free trial.

... or subscribe as a group

In a recent interview with Jonathan Tepperman of Foreign Affairs, Assad clung to his usual mix of apparent overture and undented certainty that he and his clan are on the winning side of the Syrian war.

Alternating between a willingness to talk to genuine opponents (not exiled “puppets” of Western powers) and a readiness to co-operate with the United States against Islamic State militants, Assad ultimately delivered his father’s mantra - “Syria is the heart of the Middle East” - and one clear conclusion: “We all believe that Syria should go back to the way it was. We don’t have any other option”.

In passing, Assad lashed out at Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and, most specifically, at Turkey for allegedly supporting the Islamic State.

Tepperman later took the unusual step of publishing an article in the Washington Post as well as a video to give his own impressions about Assad, “a man so unyielding and deeply deceptive - or delusional - that it’s impossible to imagine him ever negotiating an equitable end to Syria’s civil war.”

What the interview reveals - for those who have not met both father and son - is that Bashar al-Assad will cling to power irrespective of the destruction it rqeuires. He will use any method to that end, from his residual stock of chemical weapons to alliance reversals to an extension of the conflict beyond Syria’s borders.

On Turkey’s side, there is no progress in sight either.

On 29 January, President Erdoğan explained on TRT Haber, a public television channel, his well-known position that a no-fly zone is necessary; that the fight against the Islamic State is not enough; and that the anti–Islamic State coalition should go after the Assad regime.

Meanwhile, Turkey will not let the coalition use the country’s air bases and will focus the bulk of its activity on humanitarian relief for Syrian refugees.

As impeccably logical as the link to the Assad regime may seem, Turkey’s position leaves an uneasy feeling in Western chancelleries, namely that the real reason for the Turkish lack of engagement against the Islamic State is in fact motivated by the sympathies among religious conservative voters for the Islamic State’s anti-Western narrative.

In Moscow on 26 and 27 January, a meeting of carefully handpicked “Syrian opponents” took place, followed on 28 and 29 January by meetings with the head of the Syrian delegation, ambassador Bashar Jaafari, and with Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov.

Moscow’s prudent intermediation is based on a group of opponents acceptable to Damascus and excludes any hint at regime change in Syria.

Unsurprisingly, the discussions did not yield a result.

Since the beginning of hostilities in eastern Ukraine, it has become clear that the Syrian civil war is being used by Moscow as an important “nuisance factor” in its multidimensional political conflict with Western powers.

It is certainly not of comparable importance to Crimea or Donbass, or even air force harassment tactics over northern Europe, but the Syrian conflict helps the Kremlin make its fierce opposition to the Western position felt once more.

As a sad reminder, observers must remember that the scale of the Syrian tragedy - 200,000 dead, 1 million injured, over 10 million displaced - doesn’t always impress in Moscow.

Last time I asked about this, the Russian answer was soberly blunt: “We lost 20 million in the Second World War.”

A number of other factors further compound the Syrian quagmire: US leader Barack Obama’s unwillingness to confront Assad militarily; the strong military involvement of Iran and Hezbollah on the ground; and the Russian weapon resupplies, which have been uninterrupted since spring 2011.

Given the seemingly intractable nature of the Syrian conflict, Washington has for some time been tempted to consider the “lesser of evils”: striking a deal with Assad.

The prospect of such a political arrangement is undoubtedly the most shameful that the millions of Syrian refugees or displaced people could ever imagine. And yet, it is no longer unimaginable given the resilience of the Islamic State and the impossibility to strike the militants effectively in northern Syria in the absence of an operational agreement with Turkey.

Two or three years ago, one could contemplate - albeit naively - the moment when Assad himself would become a liability to the Kremlin.

Not only did that moment not happen, but Syria has now become a “useful tragedy” in Moscow’s much wider anti-Western strategy.

No doubt, the Syrian civil war will find its place in the history books as the ultimate example of cynical realpolitik.

Marc Pierini is a visiting scholar at Carnegie Europe. He is a former EU ambassador to both Turkey and Syria

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this opinion piece are the author's, not those of EUobserver.

Russia puts EU in nuclear-energy paradox

There's unprecedented international anxiety about the safety of Ukraine's nuclear reactors, but many European countries are also turning to nuclear power to secure energy supplies.

How Ukraine made the case anew for an EU army

The Kremlin attacked Ukraine because it believed it could afford to. It perceived nuclear deterrence between Russia and the West as reciprocal, and therefore almost a non-issue. It also saw, in military terms, Europe is disappearing from the world map.

Column

Global hunger crisis requires more than just the Odessa deal

International donors are playing hide and seek. Instead of stepping up their assistance programmes, richer nations are cutting overseas aid, or reallocating funds from other parts of the world towards the Ukraine crisis.

Exploiting the Ukraine crisis for Big Business

From food policy to climate change, corporate lobbyists are exploiting the Ukraine crisis to try to slash legislation that gets in the way of profit. But this is only making things worse.

Stakeholders' Highlights

  1. EFBWW – EFBH – FETBBConstruction workers can check wages and working conditions in 36 countries
  2. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic and Canadian ministers join forces to combat harmful content online
  3. European Centre for Press and Media FreedomEuropean Anti-SLAPP Conference 2022
  4. Nordic Council of MinistersNordic ministers write to EU about new food labelling
  5. Nordic Council of MinistersEmerging journalists from the Nordics and Canada report the facts of the climate crisis
  6. Council of the EUEU: new rules on corporate sustainability reporting

Join EUobserver

Support quality EU news

Join us