Obama’s strategy on Islamic State revives tensions over Syria
|
Version 0 of 1. BEIRUT — The prospect of deeper American involvement in Syria is reopening the stark global divide that fueled the escalation of the conflict three years ago, underscoring the challenges confronting President Obama in his first real foray into the morass of Syria’s war. The moderate Syrian opposition welcomed Obama’s pledges of accelerated support as well as possible airstrikes against Islamic State militants, which could potentially reverse more than a year of defeats on the battlefield inflicted both by the militants and by the government of President Bashar al-Assad. But Syria’s main allies, Russia and Iran, expressed dismay that the United States apparently plans to intervene without their approval in the conflict that Assad had until recently appeared to be winning. Russia warned that airstrikes conducted without the endorsement of the Syrian government would count as an “act of aggression,” and said the United States should seek the endorsement of the U.N. Security Council before undertaking any form of intervention. Iran, whose military and financial support has been instrumental in sustaining Assad’s hold on power, said it had “severe misgivings” about a strategy that the United States intends to carry out in coordination with the countries Iran accuses of facilitating the rise of the extremist Islamic State. As Secretary of State John F. Kerry wooed America’s traditional Sunni allies in Saudi Arabia on Thursday, Iran questioned his motives. “Some of the countries in the coalition are among the financial and military supporters of terrorists in Iraq and Syria,” Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Marzieh Afkham told reporters in Tehran on Thursday. Syria’s government, which had been hoping to position itself as a key partner in an international coalition against terrorism, made no official statement. The strategy outlined by Obama on Wednesday envisaged no role for Assad in Syria’s future. In media interviews, Syrian officials made it clear they are unhappy that Assad’s regime has been excluded from Obama’s calculations. “If any strike is carried out without our coordination, we will consider it an aggression,” Bouthaina Shaaban, a close adviser to Assad, told CNN. “President Obama would be very much ill-advised to carry on with what he said.” Although Iran and the United States find themselves fighting on the same side against the militants in Iraq, in Syria they are on different sides of a complicated, triangular fight. The rebels are battling both the government and the Islamic State. The latter two have recently begun fighting each other. Iranian and Russian military and financial support was instrumental in ensuring that Assad survived the original rebellion against his rule. There is a risk, rebel leaders say, that an increase now in U.S. aid to the rebels will be matched by new Iranian and Russian support to the government. U.S. officials are hoping, however, that Russia and Iran will tire of funneling arms and money to the regime and instead increase pressure on Assad to submit to diplomatic efforts to negotiate his departure. Obama’s plan anoints moderate rebels as the chief beneficiaries of his counterterrorism strategy, with U.S. officials saying they see opposition fighters as the forces who will move in and hold ground once Islamic State militants are forced to withdraw. Whether Syria’s disorganized and divided rebels are in a position to fulfill that role is in question. The Obama plan offers no new pledges of support for the opposition, but he promised to speed up passage through Congress of a $500 million package pledged in June that is intended to provide equipment and training to vetted moderate groups. The Syrian opposition coalition expressed concern that a strategy that focuses on the destruction of the Islamic State without also removing Assad would not work. “The Assad regime represents the root cause of the violence, brutality and sense of impunity prevailing in Syria,” said the coalition’s president, Hadi al-Bahra, in a statement. “That is why combating ISIS alone cannot bring about a stable and extremist-free region.” ISIS is an acronym for Islamic State. A modest increase in assistance to the rebels in recent months, under a covert program authorized by Obama last year, suggests the larger support envisaged by the counterterrorism strategy may make a difference on both fronts of the insurgents’ war. Since July, moderate rebel brigades have succeeded in halting a government advance on the strategically vital northern city of Aleppo. They have also held at bay an offensive by the Islamic State against a string of villages in the northern Aleppo countryside. After more than a year of defections to more extremist battalions, rebel fighters are now lining up to join the umbrella Free Syrian Army, lured in part by Western promises of help, said Hussam Marie, a spokesman for the moderate rebels in northern Syria. “A lot of groups are coming to us and asking to join the Free Syrian Army,” he said. With more support, he said, “we can recruit many more people.” In the northern city of Raqqah, the Islamic State’s biggest stronghold , there have been signs that the militants are rattled by the sudden international focus. In recent days, the Islamic State began withdrawing large quantities of armor and personnel from the city, a resident said — although it wasn’t clear whether that was in response to a recent wave of Syrian strikes targeting their positions or anticipation of American ones. |