The ceasefire in Syria and the Russia-US alliance

Moscow and Washington have announced that a ceasefire will begin in Syria, effective from midnight next Saturday, provided that all the parties concerned declare their commitment to it by Friday evening. This has already been accepted by the Syrian opposition groups which met in the Saudi capital Riyadh, as well as by the Syrian regime. According to the ceasefire plan, the opposition is required to stop all forms of attacks by means of any type of weapons — including missiles, mortars and anti-tank missiles — against regime forces (or any affiliated forces). In exchange, the military activity by the regime, Russia and the US-led alliance will target Daesh and Al-Nusra Front forces exclusively, as well as any other organisation labelled as a terrorist group. Russia and the US will agree on mapping out the areas under the control of terrorist organisations at the UN Security Council in order to address the issue of interference and overlapping on the ground.

This is the core of the Russia-US agreement. The essence lies in the overlap of the military activity of many forces and groups, with various affiliations and sources of influence. This makes it difficult to determine their positions, which leaves room for Russian air strikes, in particular, to target areas that may include opposition forces. The Russians, until recently, considered Ahrar Al-Sham as part of Al-Nusra Front, and so it is not included within the ceasefire terms. However, in exchange for America’s concession to neutralise Al-Nusra based on Saudi and Turkish pressure, Russia agreed to end attacks on the ground. This may allow for some deviation from the original ceasefire agreement.

Some analysts believe that this agreement is arguably the last chance for the US to limit Russia’s role at its current level in Syria and to prevent it from advancing on the ground. Such Russian progress causes the US and its Gulf allies to lose their proxies in Syria. Meanwhile, others believe that the agreement gives Russia the opportunity to end its involvement in Syria now that its ally, President Bashar Al-Assad, has become stronger. Although there is a relative degree of equality between Russia and America, there are those who appear to be losing out, such as Turkey and Saudi Arabia, although that impression may be superficial. Both Ankara and Riyadh have been exhausted politically and militarily by their intervention in Syria, and perhaps this agreement will provide an escape route for both.

Assad’s announcement of parliamentary elections to be held on 13 April as planned seems to be an early declaration of victory, especially since intelligence circulated by the media has suggested that Russia put pressure on Syria to postpone the polls until a political agreement is reached. It has been hinted, though, that following the ceasefire agreement Russia backed down from linking the elections to political achievements; it is stressed that there is relative stability in the country with the ceasefire agreement and Russia’s role. Moscow will accept the election results in order to give its role and influence in Syria some legitimacy.

More importantly, regardless of the motives of Washington and Moscow, the ceasefire agreement announced by Russia and the US bypassed the UN, especially the Security Council. It also bypassed the P5+1 countries which negotiated the nuclear agreement with Iran. At the moment, this Russia-US alliance on Syria can lead international policy jointly, distancing itself relatively-speaking from other alliances. If the ceasefire is successful, it will establish a new system that may act as the backbone of international policy. However, we must not overlook the potential variables in the American political arena, not least the forthcoming presidential election later this year. A Republican president in the White House may disregard completely everything mapped out during Barack Obama’s terms in office. We saw such changes during the Cold War with the policy differences of successive Democrat and Republican presidents.

Perhaps the most important thing that may come out of this ceasefire on the ground is that all military action will be directed at two major terrorist forces, Daesh and Al-Nusra Front, while Syrians besieged in the areas under these groups’ control will be supplied with food, medication and maybe even protection. This may well cut the flow of Syrian refugees heading to Europe, which will be a marginal but automatic side-effect of an end to general hostilities.

There are bound to be claims that the ceasefire terms have been violated, but there is the political will in Washington and Moscow to overlook minor breaches. This will ensure that the process can move on to the next stage, which is a political solution, the battle for which is likely to be fiercer than the military version.

Translated from Palsawa, 24 February, 2016

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.