Vladimir Putin has vastly different objectives in Syria than the West, but not much has worked so far
Such is the torment of Syria’s ongoing war that the idea of Russia sending in its forces to attack ISIS have caused a rare diplomatic mix of alarm and excitement.
I mean, really, would that be truly bad news? Or something to be hoped for, given all the recent disasters there? Would more direct Russian involvement prolong the fighting, or shorten it? Do we even have a clue?
We know only that intelligence reports have Vladimir Putin’s Russia stepping up large transport flights of new military equipment for Syria, as well as barracks for personnel on the ground.
And now Reuters is reporting that Russian forces have begun participating in military operations alongside Syrian government troops.
The U.S. had warned Moscow against any such move, even if meant to fight ISIS, a common enemy.
Washington’s position is that more direct Russian involvement, beyond the military advisers it’s had in the country, would further escalate the fighting, increase refugee flows, and risk even broader extension of a conflict now destabilizing much of the Middle East.
Certainly Russia’s responsibility for the bloodshed there over these past four years is substantial as it has been, along with Iran, the primary supplier of arms and diplomatic muscle to the besieged Assad government.
Until now, at least, no boots on the ground, but plenty of planes and ammo.
Always Syria’s friend. A Syrian election poster last year on a micro-bus shows, from left, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Lebanese Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah. (Reuters)
On the other hand, what has the West’s own vague, often distracted and mostly hands-off policy achieved?
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
