Russian airstrikes restore Syrian military balance of power

[webfact]

Russian airstrikes restore Syrian military balance of power
By ZEINA KARAM

BEIRUT (AP) — Weeks of Russian airstrikes in Syria appear to have restored enough momentum to the government side to convince President Bashar Assad's foes and the world community that even if he doesn't win the war he cannot quickly be removed by force.

That realization, combined with the growing sense that the world's No. 1 priority is the destruction of the Islamic State group, has led many to acknowledge that however unpalatable his conduct of the war, Assad will have to be tolerated for at least some time further.

The most dramatic sign of that came Tuesday with the statement by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry that Assad's future will be determined by the Syrian people, suggesting in the clearest way yet that he can stay on for now and be part of a transition.

That statement — less a reversal than the culmination of a rethink that had been underway for months — was doubly piquant coming in Moscow, where Kerry was discussing the Syria question with Russian officials.


"The Russians with their military intervention have basically said you can refuse to talk to Bashar Assad, but that means that you won't get a political solution," said Yezid Sayigh, a senior associate at the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut. "If you do want that, then you have to deal with this man."

Still, significant gaps remain between the U.S. and Russia on Assad's future, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power said Wednesday, emphasizing that the U.S. position on Assad has not changed. "There is going to have to be a political transition, and Assad will have to go," Power told reporters ahead of a major international conference on Syria in New York on Friday.

Russia, a key backer of Assad, began a campaign of airstrikes in Syria on Sept. 30 at a critical juncture in the civil war, when Assad's forces were fast losing ground to the rebels around areas considered key to the government's survival.

While Moscow says its airstrikes target the Islamic State group and other "terrorists" in Syria, much of the Russian air campaign has focused on more moderate forces fighting Assad in the country's central and northern region where IS has little or no presence.

The results have been slow in coming. Despite nearly 11 weeks of crushing Russian airstrikes, government troops aided by Lebanese Hezbollah and Iranian allied forces have failed to reverse losses in the northern province of Idlib and in Palmyra, the ancient desert town in central Syria that fell to the Islamic State group over the summer.

The Russian airstrikes, however, have helped Assad slow or halt rebel advances on several fronts — and he has captured dozens of villages in northern and western Syria.

The government's biggest victory so far was last month's lifting of a three-year siege on the military air base of Kweiras by extremist groups in the northern province of Aleppo.

That was followed Monday by Syrian troops' capture of a sprawling military air base near Damascus that had been held by rebels for the past three years, bolstering the government's presence in an area overwhelmingly controlled by opposition forces.

And on Wednesday, government forces captured a strategic mountain in the northwest, inching closer to a rebel-held stronghold in the coastal province of Latakia. Capturing the mountains of Latakia would reduce threats to the coast and open the way for government forces to advance toward Salma, another opposition bastion.

While it falls short of a strategic shift, the Russian intervention seems to have restored a battlefield stalemate that existed before rebels made a series of startling gains earlier this year that jolted Assad and his Russian allies into action.

The Russian life-line has energized Assad, who in May acknowledged in a rare public appearance that severe battlefield losses had forced his troops to relinquish large areas in the country's north.

In the past month, Assad has given a series of interviews in which he defiantly indicated he might run again in new elections and more recently said he will not negotiate with the armed opposition.

"Russia has claimed it intervened in Syria to help forge a political solution to the crisis. However, Russia has only brought about more bloodshed and destruction and made Assad more intransigent," said Mohammed Yahya Maktabi, an official with the Syrian National Coalition, the main opposition group in exile.

Speaking in Moscow on Tuesday, Kerry said the U.S. and its partners "are not seeking so-called regime change" and said the focus now is on facilitating a peace process in which "Syrians will be making decisions for the future of Syria."

Syrian opposition members scoff at such remarks and say they reflect America's longstanding reluctance to topple Assad.

"How can there be elections if this man is still in power? In 50 years, there was not a (free) election," said Abu al-Hassan Marea, an opposition activist who now resides in Turkey near the Syrian border.

Aron Lund, a Syria expert, said the Russian intervention raised the stakes and helped give momentum to talks by 17 nations in Vienna last month that included Iran at the table for the first time.

A peace plan they agreed to said nothing about Assad's future, but stated that "free and fair elections" would be held within 18 months after Assad's representatives and opposition figures begin talks on a new constitution.

The plan itself seems shaky and vulnerable to manipulation, potentially allowing Assad to hold another bogus election.

Still, it reflects that Washington and Moscow now realize they must work together for an end to the conflict and have basically agreed to defer the question of Assad staying or going in favor of getting a process rolling.

"They still seem to have fundamentally different preferences for the outcome," said Lund, editor of Syria in Crisis, a website published by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

"The fact that Americans and Russians view each other as indispensable to a solution does not mean that the political gap between them has narrowed much, or that a deal can be implemented on the ground where there is extreme polarization and total mayhem, with too many armed groups for anyone to keep track of," Lund said.
___

Associated Press writer Philip Issa in Beirut contributed to this report.


-- (c) Associated Press 2015-12-17

[craigt3365]

I guess this proves Russia's #1 goal was to support Assad. So much for claims of going after IS.

While Moscow says its airstrikes target the Islamic State group and other "terrorists" in Syria, much of the Russian air campaign has focused on more moderate forces fighting Assad in the country's central and northern region where IS has little or no presence.

[retarius]

Seems to me that Assad is the least bad of the options available to Syria; none of the bunch of terrorists calling themselves 'opposition' are fit for purpose. Now the Americans having opened Pandora's Box by creating ISIS are having to rethink. Their rethink will be to carve up Syria in a cynical move to get the pipeline they so desperately want.

Lavrov and Putin are the dream team of diplomacy having outmaneuvered the US many time and time again. Using the idea of democracy against the American plans was pure beauty....how could the US after years of parroting about democracy refuse it in Syria now? And his performance at the G20 calling out the hypocrites was breathtaking. The West, after years of electing liars, simply lack anyone of the calibre of Putin as a leader. It proves the old Roman maxim that in times of war you need a dictator.

[craigt3365]

Seems to me that Assad is the least bad of the options available to Syria; none of the bunch of terrorists calling themselves 'opposition' are fit for purpose. Now the Americans having opened Pandora's Box by creating ISIS are having to rethink. Their rethink will be to carve up Syria in a cynical move to get the pipeline they so desperately want.

Lavrov and Putin are the dream team of diplomacy having outmaneuvered the US many time and time again. Using the idea of democracy against the American plans was pure beauty....how could the US after years of parroting about democracy refuse it in Syria now? And his performance at the G20 calling out the hypocrites was breathtaking. The West, after years of electing liars, simply lack anyone of the calibre of Putin as a leader. It proves the old Roman maxim that in times of war you need a dictator.

Syria is not a democracy. Just because Putin says so....doesn't make it so. Russia is far from being democratic....

You think Putin tells the truth? Really??? A bit one sided.

[konying]

I guess this proves Russia's #1 goal was to support Assad. So much for claims of going after IS.

While Moscow says its airstrikes target the Islamic State group and other "terrorists" in Syria, much of the Russian air campaign has focused on more moderate forces fighting Assad in the country's central and northern region where IS has little or no presence.

And also proves US objective from the start was to meddle in sovereign state because US did not like its leader

[craigt3365]

I guess this proves Russia's #1 goal was to support Assad. So much for claims of going after IS.

While Moscow says its airstrikes target the Islamic State group and other "terrorists" in Syria, much of the Russian air campaign has focused on more moderate forces fighting Assad in the country's central and northern region where IS has little or no presence.

And also proves US objective from the start was to meddle in sovereign state because US did not like its leader

The US stated that position from the start. At least they were honest about their objectives. A regime change. And for good reason. He's the one who started all this! LOL

[Credo]

Seems to me that Assad is the least bad of the options available to Syria; none of the bunch of terrorists calling themselves 'opposition' are fit for purpose. Now the Americans having opened Pandora's Box by creating ISIS are having to rethink. Their rethink will be to carve up Syria in a cynical move to get the pipeline they so desperately want.

Lavrov and Putin are the dream team of diplomacy having outmaneuvered the US many time and time again. Using the idea of democracy against the American plans was pure beauty....how could the US after years of parroting about democracy refuse it in Syria now? And his performance at the G20 calling out the hypocrites was breathtaking. The West, after years of electing liars, simply lack anyone of the calibre of Putin as a leader. It proves the old Roman maxim that in times of war you need a dictator.

The US neither wants nor needs a pipelines through Syria.

[Assurancetourix]

*edited out*

Some members here must open their eyes and ears and read other sources than offical ones .

With internet it's not difficult to have differents point of view; an eample

https://www.rt.com/

We know that Russia isn't a democracy ;
Thailand also isn't ; Saudi Arabia , Qatar are they democratic countries ?

Craigt3365, a topic is offtopic when it's not your opinion !!! Good example

War in Syria is the continuity of other wars USA did before all over this earth : Libya, Egypt , Irak because of hypothetical WMD
But with Russia , they have fallen on a bone ; a big one ;
Russia isn't alone they have allies: China and Iran which aren't insignificant countries.

Edited December 17, 2015 by Scott
remark edited out

[geriatrickid]

I remember George Bush and his ill timed "Mission Accomplished" photo op. The west had and still has air superiority in Iraq, and yet we see ISIL running wild. The difference of course is that Assad's army is still functional and it is bolstered by Iranians and Hizbollah affiliated Palestinian and Lebanese Arabs. However, the reality is that the Syrian army has taken heavy losses with significant attrition. Desertion and conscription rates are reportedly high. ISIL is not on the run, nor is it close to being defeated. It will change tactics and bring its war to Lebanon and to Russia. I anticipate that we will soon see suicide bombings with a severity and frequency similar to those now experienced in Iraq and Afghanistan. As much as the Sunnis despise ISIL, they hate the Shiites even more, I expect we will see ISIL aided and indirectly supported once ISIL turns its attention to Hizbollah, Iran and Russia. Nothing is ever simple in this region. We are in for a long period of heartache, pain and suffering.

[robblok]

I guess this proves Russia's #1 goal was to support Assad. So much for claims of going after IS.

While Moscow says its airstrikes target the Islamic State group and other "terrorists" in Syria, much of the Russian air campaign has focused on more moderate forces fighting Assad in the country's central and northern region where IS has little or no presence.

And also proves US objective from the start was to meddle in sovereign state because US did not like its leader

The US stated that position from the start. At least they were honest about their objectives. A regime change. And for good reason. He's the one who started all this! LOL

A regime change for a good reason.. and by doing so sending refugees to Europe and refusing to take them to the USA. The USA should stay out of the middle east. They have made a real mess of it and let the EU take care of the refugees. Everything they did has failed only made things worse. Sadam and Assad might not have been perfect but it was far more peaceful and no ISIS and refugees. Democracy does not work everywhere. Besides its not about democracy its about oil for the US.

[TimmyT]

"more moderate forces fighting Assad" you mean Al Quaeda?

the newly declassified 2012 Pentagon report states that for “THE WEST, GULF COUNTRIES, AND TURKEY [WHO] SUPPORT THE [sYRIAN] OPPOSITION… THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY OF ESTABLISHING A DECLARED OR UNDECLARED SALAFIST PRINCIPALITY IN EASTERN SYRIA (HASAKA AND DER ZOR), AND THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THE SUPPORTING POWERS TO THE OPPOSITION WANT, IN ORDER TO ISOLATE THE SYRIAN REGIME…”.

SALAFIST= Islamist, like Muslim brotherhood, Al Quaeda or ISIL.

it means that US and it's satellites supported Radical Islamic terrorists in order to topple Assad, because he is an ally of Iran and Russia.

US just use the "democracy idea" as an justification to topple regimes which does not want to become US satellites. and to archive this goal US can support Al Quaeda or any zealots. This happened in Afghanistan (where Usama Bin Laden was funded), in Iraq and Libya (where ISIL is the main force now) and many other countries.

so who is the evil empire now?!

Edited December 17, 2015 by TimmyT

[craigt3365]

With all due respect, Rob, the US is energy independent and even looking at starting to export oil. So that's not a valid argument any more.

The Middle East has been a mess for a long time. Yes, the US made it worse, but Colonial powers really messed things up years ago by drawing lines in the sand. I think this is an interesting quote from someone who lives there:

[robblok]

With all due respect, Rob, the US is energy independent and even looking at starting to export oil. So that's not a valid argument any more.

The Middle East has been a mess for a long time. Yes, the US made it worse, but Colonial powers really messed things up years ago by drawing lines in the sand. I think this is an interesting quote from someone who lives there:

There was stability before the US invaded Iraq under false pretenses and messed around in Afghanistan. Then again Irak and Syria now if they did take up the refugees they caused then sure Id be ok with it but now they let Europe take the fallout. Sorry no respect from me on that point for the US.

At the time of the gulf wars the US was not energy independent, I dont like dictators, but this mess is far worse and every-time the US meddled it got worse. They never seemed to learn and let others pay for their mistakes.

ISIS became what it is because of the US.

Nothing against Americans, but I got something against this stupid foreign policy that causes refugees to swamp Europe. They should all send them to the US as they caused the mess.

[Scott]

Off-topic posts and one with an oversized graphic have been removed.

[bangkapi]

Russia is the hero here. Assad has every right to stay in power and the US is meddling as always.

[craigt3365]

With all due respect, Rob, the US is energy independent and even looking at starting to export oil. So that's not a valid argument any more.

The Middle East has been a mess for a long time. Yes, the US made it worse, but Colonial powers really messed things up years ago by drawing lines in the sand. I think this is an interesting quote from someone who lives there:

There was stability before the US invaded Iraq under false pretenses and messed around in Afghanistan. Then again Irak and Syria now if they did take up the refugees they caused then sure Id be ok with it but now they let Europe take the fallout. Sorry no respect from me on that point for the US.

At the time of the gulf wars the US was not energy independent, I dont like dictators, but this mess is far worse and every-time the US meddled it got worse. They never seemed to learn and let others pay for their mistakes.

ISIS became what it is because of the US.

Nothing against Americans, but I got something against this stupid foreign policy that causes refugees to swamp Europe. They should all send them to the US as they caused the mess.

The middle east hasn't been stable for a long time even before the gulf wars. Syria had problems with Islamist militants many years ago. Same with Egypt. But yes, the US made things worse. But can't blame them for 100% of this problem. Too complex for that....Maybe we should go back to the problems the colonial powers made right after WW2? Lots of foreign powers messing around in that area....

[robblok]

With all due respect, Rob, the US is energy independent and even looking at starting to export oil. So that's not a valid argument any more.

The Middle East has been a mess for a long time. Yes, the US made it worse, but Colonial powers really messed things up years ago by drawing lines in the sand. I think this is an interesting quote from someone who lives there:

There was stability before the US invaded Iraq under false pretenses and messed around in Afghanistan. Then again Irak and Syria now if they did take up the refugees they caused then sure Id be ok with it but now they let Europe take the fallout. Sorry no respect from me on that point for the US.

At the time of the gulf wars the US was not energy independent, I dont like dictators, but this mess is far worse and every-time the US meddled it got worse. They never seemed to learn and let others pay for their mistakes.

ISIS became what it is because of the US.

Nothing against Americans, but I got something against this stupid foreign policy that causes refugees to swamp Europe. They should all send them to the US as they caused the mess.

The middle east hasn't been stable for a long time even before the gulf wars. Syria had problems with Islamist militants many years ago. Same with Egypt. But yes, the US made things worse. But can't blame them for 100% of this problem. Too complex for that....Maybe we should go back to the problems the colonial powers made right after WW2? Lots of foreign powers messing around in that area....

Of course we can blame the US, the problems have been made a LOT worse. There were no wars or refugee streams no constant terrorist attacks happig there and in Europe. So yes we can blame the US for a lot of things. They should take responsibility and take the refugees in. The problems that were there were minor compared to what it is now.

[oneday]

The more I think about it, the more comfortable I am with Russia bombing the Syrian rebels. There has been much speculation that once the war is over these very same rebels could turn into Islamic terrorists and turn against the people that helped them. Hopefully all this bombing will take the fight out of all participates once it is over.

[Rancid]

Seems to me that Assad is the least bad of the options available to Syria; none of the bunch of terrorists calling themselves 'opposition' are fit for purpose. Now the Americans having opened Pandora's Box by creating ISIS are having to rethink. Their rethink will be to carve up Syria in a cynical move to get the pipeline they so desperately want.

Lavrov and Putin are the dream team of diplomacy having outmaneuvered the US many time and time again. Using the idea of democracy against the American plans was pure beauty....how could the US after years of parroting about democracy refuse it in Syria now? And his performance at the G20 calling out the hypocrites was breathtaking. The West, after years of electing liars, simply lack anyone of the calibre of Putin as a leader. It proves the old Roman maxim that in times of war you need a dictator.

Syria is not a democracy. Just because Putin says so....doesn't make it so. Russia is far from being democratic....

You think Putin tells the truth? Really??? A bit one sided.

Well a political research team analysed the US and declared it an Oligarchy, as did former president Carter, so much for the home of democracy. In all fairness though most democracies are bought.

In other news US pilots complain that 75% of ISIS targets they locate they are not allowed to bomb, aside from that US also spent 1 year without being able to hit a single oil convoy heading to Turkey. Hmm.

Russians are not there for humanitarian reasons, of course they are helping Assad. Saudi, Qatar, Turkey and US are funding, training and arming ISIS. Not hard to verify, even senior US officials have admitted such.

The western media lies daily about what is really going on, other media like RT etc also have obvious biases to home countries but seem less blatant. Need to read extensively to get some semblance of truth.

[The Deerhunter]

With all due respect, Rob, the US is energy independent and even looking at starting to export oil. So that's not a valid argument any more.

The Middle East has been a mess for a long time. Yes, the US made it worse, but Colonial powers really messed things up years ago by drawing lines in the sand. I think this is an interesting quote from someone who lives there:

There was stability before the US invaded Iraq under false pretenses and messed around in Afghanistan. Then again Irak and Syria now if they did take up the refugees they caused then sure Id be ok with it but now they let Europe take the fallout. Sorry no respect from me on that point for the US.

At the time of the gulf wars the US was not energy independent, I dont like dictators, but this mess is far worse and every-time the US meddled it got worse. They never seemed to learn and let others pay for their mistakes.

ISIS became what it is because of the US.

Nothing against Americans, but I got something against this stupid foreign policy that causes refugees to swamp Europe. They should all send them to the US as they caused the mess.

The middle east hasn't been stable for a long time even before the gulf wars. Syria had problems with Islamist militants many years ago. Same with Egypt. But yes, the US made things worse. But can't blame them for 100% of this problem. Too complex for that....Maybe we should go back to the problems the colonial powers made right after WW2? Lots of foreign powers messing around in that area....

"Maybe we should go back to the problems the colonial powers made right after WW2? Lots of foreign powers messing around in that area...." ????????????

Sorry, it was the problems the colonial powers made right after WW1!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Berindist]

The original post says:

Speaking in Moscow on Tuesday, Kerry said the U.S. and its partners "are not seeking so-called regime change" and said the focus now is on facilitating a peace process in which "Syrians will be making decisions for the future of Syria."

It would have been much better if the US would concentrate on fighting ISIS rather than fighting Assad.

After all what is the main priority?

In my opinion there is much more threat from ISIS than from Assad.

ISIS is much more dangerous than Assad.

Edited December 17, 2015 by Berindist

[Nobb]

Great for Syrians but bad for the Russian people who are suffering because of the money the Russian government is spending on the Syrians. Happy to see ISIS destroyed and hope all countries demolished from the whole globe. But if this is what it takes to end hate and terrorism i commend them! Glad to see all countries hate these terrorist!

[Scott]

An off-topic post has been removed.

[ParadiseLost]

Well a political research team analysed the US and declared it an Oligarchy, as did former president Carter, so much for the home of democracy. In all fairness though most democracies are bought.

In other news US pilots complain that 75% of ISIS targets they locate they are not allowed to bomb, aside from that US also spent 1 year without being able to hit a single oil convoy heading to Turkey. Hmm.

Russians are not there for humanitarian reasons, of course they are helping Assad. Saudi, Qatar, Turkey and US are funding, training and arming ISIS. Not hard to verify, even senior US officials have admitted such.

The western media lies daily about what is really going on, other media like RT etc also have obvious biases to home countries but seem less blatant. Need to read extensively to get some semblance of truth.

"In other news US pilots complain that 75% of ISIS targets they locate they are not allowed to bomb"

I heard mention this week of a report leaked which seemed to indicate the US was 'running short of bombs'... Did anyone else read this?

It would be so funny if it were true, until you consider how much destruction they have caused. It also appears the IS guys simply use tunnels to hide from air strikes, so once again the US seems to have all the fancy (wrong) weapons and the guys in the turbans and flip-flops are laughing at them.

About time the US public object to spending hundreds of billions of dollars on an ineffective outdated peacock tail of a military institution...

[h90]

I guess this proves Russia's #1 goal was to support Assad. So much for claims of going after IS.

While Moscow says its airstrikes target the Islamic State group and other "terrorists" in Syria, much of the Russian air campaign has focused on more moderate forces fighting Assad in the country's central and northern region where IS has little or no presence.

Which is good. The Assad is the only one who isn't an Islamist. As Atheist I would support him without any question.

[craigt3365]

I guess this proves Russia's #1 goal was to support Assad. So much for claims of going after IS.

While Moscow says its airstrikes target the Islamic State group and other "terrorists" in Syria, much of the Russian air campaign has focused on more moderate forces fighting Assad in the country's central and northern region where IS has little or no presence.

Which is good. The Assad is the only one who isn't an Islamist. As Atheist I would support him without any question.

I think you are confused. Assad is an Alawite. An Islamist sect centered in Syria:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alawites

Alawites consider themselves to be Muslims, although some Sunnis dispute that they are.^[58] Alawite doctrine incorporates Gnostic, neo-Platonic, Islamic, Christian and other elements and has, therefore, been described as syncretic.^[11][59]

Alawite beliefs have never been confirmed by their modern religious authorities.^[60] Alawites tend to conceal their beliefs (taqiyya) due to historical persecution.^[61] Some tenets of the faith are secret, known only to a select few;^[31][62] therefore, they have been described as a mystical sect.^[63]

[konying]

Berindist. Nothing to do with democracy, everything to do with either political influence or some benefit to US.

Democracy is a pretext used by US to meddle , invade or over throw .

There are by far more extremist dictators such as Saudi, who US supports yet Assad is bad.

Ukraine had little to do with democracy .

Egypt , Bahrain , lybia, Iraq and list goes on

[khunken]

I guess this proves Russia's #1 goal was to support Assad. So much for claims of going after IS.

Which is good. The Assad is the only one who isn't an Islamist. As Atheist I would support him without any question.

I think you are confused. Assad is an Alawite. An Islamist sect centered in Syria:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alawites

Alawites consider themselves to be Muslims, although some Sunnis dispute that they are.^[58] Alawite doctrine incorporates Gnostic, neo-Platonic, Islamic, Christian and other elements and has, therefore, been described as syncretic.^[11][59]

Alawite beliefs have never been confirmed by their modern religious authorities.^[60] Alawites tend to conceal their beliefs (taqiyya) due to historical persecution.^[61] Some tenets of the faith are secret, known only to a select few;^[31][62] therefore, they have been described as a mystical sect.^[63]

You still continue to post your ignorant comments about Islam. Islamist refers to the degree of fundamental Islam that the members adhere to. A similar term would be 'Christianist' if it existed but fundamentalist Christians are just described as such.

The Alawites are less 'Islamist' than the Sunnis (far less) and also the Shias. Your favourite site to quote (above) even has quite a few clues that the Alawites are most definitely not Islamist.

In a previous post you repeat the AP lies about Russia mainly targeting the 'good militias' (if any exist in reality) and not ISIS. This has been an increasing propaganda 'war' from the western media (playing to the ignorant masses) basically lying about Russia's targeting of ALL groups in opposition to Assad. I would have thought that ISIS' bombing of the Russian airliner might have put that lie to bed.

Russia has shown up the duplicious game that the US, Turkey and some EU countries have been playing. Now even the US has (partially) come to its senses and recognised that ISIS (& Al-Nusra as well as Al-Shams - an excellent name for a 'good guy' militia) are the real threats to many parts of the world, not Assad.

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and replies have been removed.

[Krataiboy]

No big deal. George Bush Jr ran the world's biggest economy with no brain at all.