Russia Proposes Joint Strikes In Syria, Will US Listen?
By Dr. Vivek Kumar Srivastava
21 May, 2016
Countercurrents.org
Russia has proposed to USA that it should come together with it for joint strikes in Syria to attack the rebels but the idea does not seem to be of much liking to the USA. USA on the other hand believes that this is proposed by Russia to elevate its standing in the global politics and this may harm the US interests. The fact is that Russian attacks since last September have forced IS to lose much of its strength. US has its own national interests which it cannot compromise but at the higher level it is harmful for whole of the humanity. US aims to remove the Assad’s government at any cost and has supported the stand of Turkey in whole of the developments. For US it appears that Assad is main issue not the IS which has thrived due to such policy perception of the USA. For the removal of Assad US and its allies have emphasized several times.
Russia started its air operations which were more effective than the US led coalition because the sorties made by the Russian air forces were quite much higher than the US which had direct impact on the containment of the IS. US never gave a thought to be associated for the joint strike because its perception is that all the ills in the region is due to Assad hence he needs to go. This may not be disputed completely but along with it there is urgent need for the joint strike on rebels Nusra Front who are associated with the al Qaeda. Nusra Front has been opposed by Russia and US both in equal manner. The US does not give any support to the Russian idea although the cease fire has been broken by the al Nusra, why is it so?
The US policy in this region is focused on the removal of Assad and the elimination of IS comes thereafter. Turkey is its main ally in this respect but US fails to grab the substance that it is not Assad but the IS which is more dangerous to it. IS has extended its area of influence quite much and in several countries its affiliates operate as Boko Harem In Nigeria and Pakistan Taliban in Pakistan. Moreover it may attempt to develop more lethal weapons and may aim to use against US. The same folly was committed by the US during the 1990s when it did not take threat of al Qaeda seriously and its base in Afghanistan when emerged with the support of the Taliban, it did not deal it effectively and could not contain Pakistan and its supported group Taliban in Afghanistan just on the ground that Russia wielded more influence Afghanistan in the previous years , hence this aspect of Taliban- al Qaeda association was ignored by it. Thus its policy development is influenced by the Russia than any other factor. This view follows the cold war psychology where both used to be arch enemy and US had all the policy focus for its containment. In post cold war age where terrorism has emerged as the most serious threat, its policies are still governed by the same notion. This is a great fault at its policy level where it needs to analyze the real threat strength of the IS than another thing.
Russian proposal therefore carries much merit but the way US looks it is not good for the world as well for the US. There is no coordination between both countries when issue of the air strikes come except communication about saving each other during the air strikes. If they carry the joint air strikes much dividends may be obtained. Even the UN can initiate the process. It has a system of collective security which is yet to be operationalised but it can be initiated now.
There are several intricacies in the region as Turkey and US are close allies but on the US support to Kurds, Turkey express displeasure. US carried nuclear deal with Iran which is not liked by Saudi Arabia, Israel. In Iraq it has failed to provide a stable government. It sells the weapons to Saudi Arabia which are used by it to maintain its orthodox government. At one place it talks about peace at other it does just opposite. It says that IS a big threat but its focus is to remove Assad, this can be dealt in due course as there are traces of peace talks and a roadmap for the Syria can be prepared. The present need is to respond positively to Russian proposal by the US but it will have to move out from the perception of the cold war age and to think in more broader and global way. Can it doo so? Over emphasis on non genuine ego determined national interests and wrong analyses of the ground realities often lead to problems. This is lesson in the international political history. US may need to learn from such mistakes.
Dr. Vivek Kumar Srivastava, presently Assistant Professor in CSJM University[affiliated college],Vice Chairman CSSP, Consultant CRIEPS, email: [email protected]