What next for the fighting in Syria? Can air strikes do the trick or is something more robust needed such as the insertion of ground forces? Hopes are high that precision attacks by coalition missile-firing drones and strike aircraft will “degrade” targets held by the Islamic State (also known as Daesh) but air power can only do so much and thought is already being given to the next stage which will almost certainly mean the deployment of UK combat troops.
Within an hour of last Wednesday’s vote in the House of Commons to permit the bombing of Islamic State targets four RAF Tornado strike aircraft were in action against targets in the skies over eastern Syria. It sent an unmistakable message that British forces were in business but the missions are only the beginning of a long haul. Prime minister David Cameron said as much when he admitted that the operations could last up to three years and that it would take “some time” to bring results. Under those circumstances there is always the danger of “mission creep” especially if the use of air power is seen to be failing.
No one has yet used the phrase “boots on the ground” but US defence secretary Ash Carter let slip the fact that US special forces are already operating with Kurdish Peshmerga forces in northern Iraq and that they would be given permission to extend their operational capacity when circumstances permitted. “It puts everybody on notice in Syria,” he told Congress. “You don’t know at night who is going to be coming in the window.”
Officially those forces are acting in a training and mentoring capacity but lines are clearly being blurred as ground forces are used in the war against Daesh. The revelations come at a time when Russian officials have admitted that soldiers from Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps are already operating in eastern Syria as ground forces in support of Russian air strikes. This was confirmed by the chair of the US House Foreign Affairs Committee Ed Royce (Republican, California) who told colleagues that the forces included Hezbollah militias most of whose fighters are Shia Muslims.
If that turns out to be the case it will mark a new phase in the fighting especially if they are used in Sunni areas and cause civilian casualties. Any hint of undue violence could lead to claims of ethnic cleansing and re-waken underlying tensions between the rival factions. And that is the main problem facing coalition members as they attempt to increase the frequency and effectiveness of aerial operations this weekend. No war in history was ever won by air power alone and although the addition of RAF Tornados and Typhoons will bring added accuracy especially with the use of their modern Brimstone missiles the fact remains that ground has to be won and then held by infantry forces.
For the coalition that is both the reality and a challenge. The leading western members of the coalition – France, Germany, the UK and the US – have no appetite for deploying their own ground forces in the region and there are question-marks over the much-vaunted 70,000 Syrian ground forces. Not only is their composition in question – some are undoubtedly loyal to Islamic fundamentalist groups including al-Qaeda – but their relationship to the Syrian people is unknown. Most of the Syrian army has remained loyal to President Bashar al-Assad who retains the support of the Russians but any long-term peace deal will require his compliance. Until it is known what part, if any, Assad will play in the future it is impossible to know how the coalition will deal with the Islamic State. Finding a solution to that conundrum is a prerequisite of any aerial campaign.
Three weeks ago foreign ministers from the west and Russia, the Gulf states and Iran, produced a joint statement in Vienna calling for a political transition that would “establish credible, inclusive and non-sectarian governance” in Syria within six months. At the same time a new constitution would be drawn up and there would be “free and fair elections” within 18 months but tellingly the same statement avoided any mention of Assad and his future role in the discussions. As that is central to a successful outcome the diplomatic initiative could stall again before an end of the year deadline to broker a new peace conference involving all parties and Syria.
Matters may become clearer next week when the same delegates reconvene this time in Paris but already the signs are not hopeful. The relationship between Turkey and Russia has been soured by the shooting down of a Russian strike aircraft, there is widespread disagreement on what to do with Assad and there is no clear leadership on the possible use of ground forces.
“I’m not expecting anything in the next few months. There is still too much to fight for on the ground,” said Michael Stephens, a Middle East analyst at the Royal United Services Institute. “Despite all these Russian airstrikes, the regime has not been able to recapture much ground around Idlib and Aleppo. At some point everyone is going to come to the realisation that nobody is going anywhere – neither the regime nor the opposition – but that time has not yet come.”
