The Syrian army’s recovery of Aleppo and defeat in Palmyra: A mixed report of victory and defeat side-by-side

On the 12th of December 2016 the Syrian Arab Army has advanced into the bulk of the former areas held by rebels and several offspring groups of the Al Nusra Front in the Eastern part of the city. Up to the last reports, there is a remaining enclave South-east of Aleppo. Still the smell of the final recovery of Syria’s second city and economic hub was being felt since yesterday, when local residents celebrated the retake of the city from the rebel forces.

Only weeks ago the Syrian regime controlled around 85% of the urban area. An ever advancing movement enabled the army to take district by district off the insurrectionists. Joined by allies such as the Syrian Kurds, the Hezbollah, and the Russians along them, the regime has recovered the whole metropolitan area, except of one remaining enclave of armed branches that did not follow the general withdrawal of their brothers in arms, all willing to draw back to the Idlib province under their control still.

The all so long awaited victory might have fallen short in the media, as simultaneously to that, the ancient city of Palmyra, fortress of the desert retaken last year, fell back to the Islamic State along some airbases in the area that had been secured in the past and taken in a very costly manner and with a lot of Russian military support. Now back under their control, the frontline has again shifted in the central area of the country.

Firstly there are generally speaking improvements in the city of Damascus, and its outskirts, which have been retaking some enclaves either by force or by an agreement of withdrawal. As such the major East Ghouta area has lost some territory to the government. It looks as if the security has seen important improvements in those regards.

A defeat and a victory, or the other way around sure gives a mixed result at the end of the day. Still the psychological impact of the surrender of the main city under insurgent control has had its share. The Idlib province and the areas close to the Syrian-Turkish border taken from the IS are there to stay, unless the army and its allies undertake a military enterprise starting east from Aleppo. The further they could approach the governmental held enclave of Fouad, the sooner the remaining northern bulk of rebel held territory could see heavy losses coming soon.

Nevertheless the battle is far from over, especially if you consider how a gain can be undone in matter of days or hours. Whence the IS continues its retreat in part of its Iraqi held territory in and around Mosul, many fighters are being shifted to the areas around Palmyra in a fashion, which evidently took the Syrians by surprise. Thus the retake might give more headlines for Damascus and Moscow, which now have been overshadowed by its recent fall.

While the UN Security Council overall seems to be quite unhappy for the success of Bashar Al-Assad, as it could be read by the numerous times that Russia and China have vetoed the resolutions in recent days and weeks, unsuccessfully urging for a truce in the Syrian city. Otherwise they always emphasized the humanitarian crisis, etc. in order to call into question the liberation itself. It looks as if a defeat of a “moderate rebel” always will be put into that light, while the battle of Mosul clearly is put forward without the slightest concern for the civilian or armed population among them. As the veto power of the Security Council today favours the Russian and Syrian side, the Western media have saturated the web with the view of the people trapped inside the war. There were allegations about massacres made by the Syrian Army, lacking any proof attached, and even the alleged executions of civilians. All these punchlines are solely there to distract of the obvious superiority of the Syrian army over the Western puppets eager to topple the evil dictator of Bashar Al-Assad.

Their failure comes short to the expectations made by their sponsors, one of which are the US-Americans. The new president-elect has clearly stated his wish to cease the supplies to these rebels despite that the Congress has been pushing a bill contemplating the further arms supplies and money to the insurgents on behalf of the US. This outgoing Democratic administration will do what remains within their reach to help those trapped inside this war. Let’s see how Trump and his Secretary of State nominee will think about this and other issues pending in January 2017.

The current conditions, in favour of the Moscow-Damascus axis are in the verge of reversing the trend and give the government the advantage it had been looking for. Then also the Russian ally has been pushing to maintain their presence in the Mediterranean Sea and with airbases in the coastal area. If the Western powers manage to rearm and the local forces regroup again in their frontlines, it could be again a long time before anyone can call any advance, may it be with the Islamic State or the motley-crew-like groups operating on the ground.

For now the major victory of Syria has been accomplished: the retake of the city of Aleppo and its outskirts. Now comes to see if the remaining areas are likely to fall too, or how long will it take to the Syrian forces to completely regain the sovereignty and territorial integrity that any country wishes to have.

The Russian proposal that might open the deadlock over the Syrian intervention or the rhetorical statement of John Kerry going against his own hidden agenda

Nobody expected this turning after the joint press conference of the Foreign Secretary of Great Britain William Hague and US Secretary of State John Kerry the past 9^th of September 2013 in London. As it appears while answering to a journalist question about which options did the government of Syria have, to avoid the confrontation, Kerry said that if all chemical weapons were handed over to international control, and eventually destroyed, an attack may be reconsidered. As it seems Kerry never thought that such an idea could become the springing board for the Russian Foreign Secretary Serguei Lavrov, to make this very offer to his Syrian counterpart Wallid Mouallem. He also added to the demand the need of subscribing the international Convention about Chemical Weapons Prohibition. Only a few hours later the Syrian government acceded fully to it, to the surprise of some of the current players, still looking how to promote an intervention in the country. As Ban Ki-Moon openly acknowledged the Russian plan, that in fact will need a great amount of effort of the UN, as a key player, suddenly the US State Department said first that the demand was being said in a rhetorical way by the US Secretary. Then Obama himself took himself some time for this subject in one of his numerous interviews given that same day on US television, that this same offer was “potentially positive”, but needed to be absolutely authentic.

In any case what does seem self-evident is that far from reaching a general consensus over the intervention in his last international tour through Western Europe, John Kerry, with or without the intention, gave the magic words to avoid it, giving way to a political solution. As it seemed there was none in the opinion of the Obama administration. The fact that Russia took over the argument, could weaken the argument of the inevitability of the intervention. The relative concession that Obama had to give to the proposal is only degraded by this powerful doubt, that anything coming from the Syrian Government isn´t trustworthy. Furthermore the new events should not interfere with the upcoming quest for the bill in the Congress concerning the limited intervention in Syria, to be duly approved by enough Congressmen. This battle is the beginning of the war the president is looking for,  and  having dropped the appearance neutrality this could only go through a tough marketing of the war, which isn´t a normal one, just a limited one, they say in the Hill.

While the general ambiance in Washington is mainly around the Syrian issue and as the next session in the Congress scheduled for this Wednesday, this has been postponed again, only making the happening of the event more uncertain and less immediate than expected. And again the French government has shown their likeliness to follow the US path to war, still doesn´t see yet the positive signs for doing this openly. Nor the British Prime Minister Cameron, after the big blow of the Parliament, having lost in his seek for a bill to be passed, allowing military intervention in Syria. Due to this limitation, he should be out of the club of this new potential Coalition of the willing, still under the Bush II administration.

If Bashar was to show any collaboration in this new political draft, his position would improve by far, as he will be having a whole new UN presence working for the recollection of all Syrian chemical arsenal as a shield preventing any hits from the sea. As for the starting consideration, that bombing military infrastructure, specially containing Chemical Weapons, is far from being helpful in order to insure the safeguard and control of those. If Damascus allows the complete destruction of the existing material an important argument would have been neutralized by Bashar Al-Assad, until the results of the other UN team in Rotterdam, Netherlands gives finally its results of the analysis of the alleged chemical attack of the past 21 August in the outskirts of Damascus. These should either way give a reason to resolve the enigma around the authorship and accountability that some countries have determined in advance, as being the government forces of Assad. Despite the proven responsibility of the rebels in the other alleged chemical attacks of Aleppo in march 2013  showed the link to the rebel forces, still doesn´t dismantle in the eyes of the logical and self-evident impossibility of the oppositional forces to handle these kind of devices.

Once the premise should be granted by the Syrians, it would be quite difficult for Obama to promote his limited war, as the main objectives would have been destroyed beforehand. Then again in the midst of harsh political times for the president, when critics inside are growing on the left of the Democrats as of the extreme right of the Republicans, it seems quite obvious his approach to take over international leadership. This will eventually require the back up of a certain majority in both chambers, nevertheless it looks as if even his own party is not really willing to go into another conflict, and not getting very much convinced of the arguments given to the Congressmen and Representatives. As a matter of fact his first front line seems to be inside the US, wining the approval for his military quest. Then would come the real thing, if until then, any surprise effect will be second to none. Even more, if there weren´t any chemical weapons to hunt, isn´t this getting an obsession of the hawk side of Obama, who after giving his smoothest side, even getting the Peace Nobel Price, now shows us his Rambo side of his government.

The true leadership of the new coalition might fall apart if the evil Syrian were to be disarming for true. The statements on this of the Obama himself, were that his offensive approach was the only way of getting a consensus for a political solution. Once again war is  just an extension of politics to the governing class. If this had been his original inclination, why then doesn´t he aborts his quest for the forsaken bill for intervention against any international law? Still all of his statements show a poker face of someone who in the past had shown people the new hope, the new leadership of the US. To the deception of many his real intention are by far quite similar to the ones of his predecessor, only the skin colour does make a certain difference to the eye.

Finally if the planned attack was to occur, as soon as possible, the latter conclusion would be that this new humanitarian interventionism isn´t open to any autonomous and proactive enemies. They obey to an image, a mold of the evil, but never give in to anything, as they are tyrants. Still this particular tyrant shows quite a resistance, and is close to put the Us strategy at stake with its own arguments. If the US are naturally world players, used to these games, then how can someone understand how  they are having such a hard time to actually persuade even their closest partners to join them. Or are they running out of arguments by now? 

The failure of the Geneva II Agreements or the hidden agenda of Western Democracies towards another failed state in Syria

The Syrian issue has become once again the topic of the major players of the so called International community. From the war of statements to the plain war, as it seems lies a gap, which is lesser and lesser. The alleged attack of Chemical weapons on civilian population occurred on the past 21 August in the outskirts of the Syrian capital Damascus has been put as a burden by both parties of this clash on the other one. It is said by the Rebel´s side that the attack was undertaken by government forces, producing around a 1300 death toll. On the other side, the government itself held the opposition responsible for it, as it denied having used, nor even possessing such weapons at all. The fact is that the tunnels which were apparently discovered by Syrian regular soldiers showed evidence of used shells and related material, of a toxic gas, that as a matter of fact affected the troops who were present at the time, proving that at least for the time being, there is presence of such poisonous armament. Despite the undergoing investigations held by a UN group on Syrian soil, still in process, some players are going ahead of time, accusing without any proof the undeniable responsibility of the regime, therefore considering all options on the table, including the intervention by the USA. The US-army has deployed two warships to the Eastern Mediterranean, close by the desired target, before even any conclusions were drawn by the UN.

The Geneva II Peace Talks are now officially outdated as it appears, as the Rebels have disclosed any possibility of them happening, by openly refusing to sit at the negotiating table. The UK government has also shown its confidence that as the Rebels couldn´t possibly uphold such weaponry; it must have been done by the regime itself, still leaving a small doubt in case. Anyhow Prime Minister David Cameron not only showed support to Obama´s intentions to intervene on a limited scale in Syria by Thursday. He also called the Parliament to gather together, to bring up a very much needed position in case this week there should be any attacks on Syrian targets by the Us-army. As well the French government has given its approval of these possible measures that are said to punish the Syrian president for its behavior before its own people. It certainly also is one of the major supporters of the idea of arming on an official basis the rebels, who seem to be losing the war on the ground.

The allies of the regime of Assad, mainly Russia and China show no will to change sides. The Saudis having tried to bribe the Russian government , this proved to be a big blow, as Moscow doesn´t seem to change its mind before an offer of 15 billion dollars on the table. The recent attempts to bring both sides on an agreement has once again failed, as for some reason the SNC is unwilling to any concession which wouldn´t include the downfall of Bashar Al-Assad as a precondition. Their most radical wing, the Al-Nusra Front openly defied the regime, having intentions to establish even a separate state within Syria under Sharia law. Some reports have even given a non-official statement that Al-Nusra is in fact in possession of such weapons, and would have been behind the events, that the UN is desperate to reveal. It looks as if some in this game are really not interested in having the naked truth seen at daylight.

The US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel has said that all the options are within reach, until the President made a choice, which would inevitably mean that by Thursday the US-army could be effectively intervening in the scene, hitting strategic points within the country for 48 hours. These operations that obviously don´t count on the granting of a UN resolution in its support, would only be followed by some NATO-countries, including Turkey which neighbors Syria in its Northern border. So again we see the Humanitarian war, the Clinton doctrine used in the case of Kosovo back in 1998-1999. The reasons are moral and ethical but certainly lack any real ground or justification, beyond these considerations said before. Secretary of State John Kerry also said that these undeniable atrocities were only held accountable to the government, actions which it will have to stand up to in front of the International Community.

Some other NATO members such as Germany or Italy have been more reserved on this issue, as they say that without any official UN mandate there would be no possibility of them being involved in such actions. In facts the Italian Foreign Minister Emma Bonino said in a press conference, that lacking such support, neither would they take part, nor would they allow anyone to use their military facilities for this purpose. Germany instead, with its past war experience, and considering that General elections are coming up soon, no one really is eager to support that kind of venture, fearful of losing popular support, hence the possibility to be in charge of taking part of the next German government.

Russia on its side has shown its full allegiance to the government of Damascus, as its president Vladimir Putin said that there is a hidden agenda behind these accusations, and that Bashar Al-Assad isn´t behind this, but the rebels. Its alliance is strong, as well as their presence in the port of Tartus will remain as such, despite the growing military tensions in the neighboring waters. In any case Russia will not give in to any pressure to topple Assad, nor will it provide the legitimacy to the venture underway. As things appear to be, the UN Security Council will not be in a position to give any ground the intentions of Paris, London or Washington. An against any odds, this will not hinder them in acting in their interest, with or without the UN mandate, as long as the so-called International Community, themselves, are backing them up.           

Nevertheless the results of the investigations are being slow, and were furthermore delayed by snipers which shot on the UN official vehicles under way to the places of evidence, which happened to be in a region controlled by the armed opposition, this hasn´t frightened them to go on in their crucial work to get the truth, as they postponed the next ride until the damaged vehicle was to be replaced. If they achieve their goal is uncertain, as the security in the rebel held zone is not granted by any means. Unless the government recovered this area, then only there is a common ground on which to work.

This could be the beginning of the REAL war, after the war of words. Neither the veto powers in the UN nor international law will further avoid the confrontation, some players are eager to push forward. No negotiations had any success, as for some reasons the SNC wasn´t able to make the slightest concession to the government, instead they were looking to accomplish their ultimate goal by all means, but never give in to anything. That is why probably the Geneva II Agreement, as well as The Hague Summit which was to be held in order to prepare the ground for the Geneva tables, between Russia and the US will never become reality. The hawks in Washington will have prevailed for now, until Obama takes the step that they are waiting for so long, the intervention on the ground. They call this Nation-building, democratization of any society, one size fits all. The history give us the proof that nor in Kosovo, nor in Libya, nor Iraq, nor in the former Yugoslavia in general terms this has proven to be possible. In the best of the results, there appears a failed state instead, with a chronic need of foreign help on a long term basis.  If this was to be the future of Syria under the SNR, may the reader consider all sides, and see, if this is really such a bright horizon for the Syrians, who have already withstood two years of continuous wars and human and material losses.

If this doesn´t touch the ones who want to overthrow the Bashar regime, it is questionable just how far their deep feelings of humanity are real, and how honest they are being towards letting the Syrians be free within their own state to choose their faith and government.