The
War of Western Failures: Hopes for Syria Fall with Aleppo
The
siege of Aleppo is a humanitarian catastrophe on a dramatic scale --
and a victory for Russian President Vladimir Putin. He has seized on
the Syrian civil war to expose an impotent West and show his own
geopolitical muscle. By SPIEGEL Staff
February
17, 2016 – 03:43 PM
Aleppo has been a
horrific place for some time now and few thought that it could get
much worse. But things can always get worse -- that's the lesson
currently being learned by those who have stayed behind in an effort
to outlast this brutal conflict. People who have become used to dead
bodies in the streets, hunger and living a life that can end at any
moment.
"For the last
two weeks, we've been living a nightmare that is worse than
everything that has come before," says Hamza, a young doctor in
an Aleppo hospital. At the beginning, in 2011, he was treating light
wounds, stemming from tear gas or beatings from police batons. When
the regime began dropping barrel bombs in 2012, the injuries got
worse. But now, with the beginning of the Russian airstrikes, the
doctors are facing an emergency. Every two or three hours, warplanes
attack the city, aiming at everything that hasn't yet been destroyed,
including apartment buildings, schools and clinics. Often, they use
cluster bombs, which have been banned internationally.
They used to get
around 10 serious injuries per day, but that number has now risen to
50, says Hamza, adding that most of their time is spent sorting body
parts so they can turn them over to family members for burial.
Russian missiles, he says, tear everyone apart who is within 35
meters of the impact.
"On one day, we
had 22 dead civilians. The day before that, it was 20 injured
children. A seven-year-old died and an eight-year-old lost his left
leg." The Russians attacked in the morning, he says, as the
children were on their way to school. "We are going to need
years of therapy in order to be able to cope with all this."
There are seven
doctors still working in the hospital. "Since the Russians began
bombing the city, even more doctors have fled," Hamza says.
There are only about 30 medical professionals left in all of Aleppo,
he adds. His hospital too is under fire and Hamza's voice can be
heard trembling over the phone. The regime, he says, has targeted the
hospital five times in the past several years, but always missed.
"The Russian bombardment, though, is very accurate." One
recent bomb, he says, just barely missed them.
A Nightmare Worse
than Sarajevo
"But here in
the center of Aleppo," the doctor says, "there aren't any
Free Syrian Army positions. Only civilians. They are bombing us to
soften us up for the regime." Assad's troops, he explains, have
already taken many surrounding towns and villages and he is afraid
that Aleppo will soon be completely surrounded. One thing he is no
longer hoping for is external assistance, saying the international
community abandoned Syria long ago. "After all, the US supports
the attacks," he says.
Hamza is unsure how
he will survive. He does not know. But leaving the city would mean
one fewer doctor, which in turn would translate into more deaths. He
says that more and more people are leaving Aleppo and that entire
city quarters are emptying out. Those who are able are fleeing while
they still can.
Once upon a time
Aleppo was the largest city in Syria, an economic powerhouse with a
city center listed as a UNESCO World Heritage site. But over the last
three years, it has been divided between the regime and the rebels --
the same rebels who joined together to drive Islamic State (IS) out
of the city two years ago. Aleppo is the most important symbol of the
resistance in the country, but now it is all but surrounded and cut
off from the most important supply routes. There is no more diesel,
hardly anything to eat and there are severe shortages of electricity
and water. According to the United Nations, there are still some
300,000 people living in Aleppo -- a population that may now have
been abandoned to a rapid death from the sky or the slow death of
starvation. It is a nightmare that could ultimately become worse even
than Sarajevo was.
Back then, during
the siege of Sarajevo in the 1990s, NATO intervened, the Dayton
Accords soon followed and the peace has held until today. In Aleppo,
there are no signs of peace coming any time soon. The Syrian civil
war has been raging for five years now and 250,000 people, or even a
half million, have died -- the UN has stopped counting. It is a war
in which more than 10 percent of the Syrian population has been
killed or injured and 11 million have been displaced, either inside
Syria or as refugees abroad. Yet there is still no Dayton in sight.
In Aleppo, the West
is faced with the ruins of its policy of inaction, which it has sold
as diplomacy. Western politicians, including the German foreign
minister, have continually insisted that only a diplomatic solution
can stop the violence in Syria. Even at the Munich Security
Conference last week, US Secretary of State John Kerry was seeking to
continue the Geneva talks, which had been suspended until Feb. 25
largely because Russia refused to reduce the number of airstrikes it
is carrying out. Ultimately, a "cessation of hostilities"
was agreed to in Munich, but it seems unlikely it will be worth much,
particularly after the bombings of two hospitals on Monday, allegedly
by the Russians, though Moscow has rejected the accusations.
Ground Zero of
Global Geopolitics
Moscow's approach to
diplomatic efforts has clearly shown just how cynical this game has
become. Russia has said that a real cease-fire can't be reached
before the end of February, making it clear that Russian President
Vladimir Putin only intends to negotiate once he has reached his
military goals. And German diplomats have said that Russia has
refused to offer any guarantees that the Assad regime would adhere to
a cease-fire.
Aleppo has made it
clear that there could very well be a military solution for Syria:
the victory of Assad achieved with the help of Russian bombs and
Syrian and Iranian ground troops. It would be the victory of a regime
that tortures and murders, a regime that drops barrel bombs on its
own people and kills them with chemical weapons. It is a regime which
stands accused by the UN of the "extermination" of its own
population.
It would likely,
though, be a victory without peace. Syrian President Bashar Assad's
calculation seems to be that once the rebels are destroyed, only the
regime and Islamic State would be left -- and no other alternatives.
But the Sunnis, which have long been in the majority in Syria, aren't
likely to throw their support behind an Alawite-Shiite Assad regime.
Syria would face years of Somalia-like failed state status.
The war has long
since ceased being solely about Syria. The country has become Ground
Zero of global geopolitics, an unholy mixture of Russia's desired
return to superpower status, an increasingly authoritarian Turkey,
tentative US foreign policy, the Kurdish conflict, the arch-rivalry
between Iran and Saudi Arabia, Islamist terror and the inability of a
divided, crisis-ridden EU to do much of anything.
The war in Syria has
transformed from a civil war into a world war.
It has long since
reached Europe in the form of millions of refugees, terror attacks in
Paris and attacks on tourists in Tunisia and Istanbul. And America,
which has long been the leader of the West and guarantor of security
in Europe, has refused to get involved. Aleppo is therefore a test of
Russia's relationship with the West, a measuring stick for the value
of democracy and a litmus test of the effectiveness of a morals-based
foreign policy.
Vladimir Putin: 1;
World: 0
Already, Vladimir
Putin looks to be one of the conflict's winners. When it comes to the
war in Syria, he is now in control. Without his bombers, military
advisors and special forces, the weakened Syrian army wouldn't be
able to make any advances at all. Indeed, it was the looming defeat
of Assad that pushed Putin to intervene at the end of September in
the first place. At the time, Putin was still claiming that his goal
was that of defeating IS -- and many Western governments hoped
naively that perhaps Russia could finally impose order in Syria.
Since then, though,
it has become clear that the opposite is true: In four-and-a-half
months, Putin has reversed the momentum in the Syrian civil war in
favor of dictator Assad and has increased the chaos -- all while
largely ignoring Islamic State. What's more, Moscow has targeted
exactly those rebels that the West had hoped would fight IS. Putin
has embarrassed the US superpower, discredited the UN and transformed
Russia into an influential power in the Middle East.
In addition, his
brutal operation has driven tens of thousands of people to take
flight, thus intensifying the conflict between the EU and Turkey,
dividing Europe even further and propelling the Continent's
right-wing populist parties to unprecedented heights. Those are all
desired side-effects that conform to Moscow's calculus: Everything
that hurts Europe makes Russia stronger.
Berlin, too, has
become convinced that Putin's involvement in Syria is about more than
merely providing support for his ally Assad -- and about more than
just the Middle East. For Putin, it's about Europe, about ending the
sanctions and about recognition of Russia's zone of influence. "Putin
is intentionally aggravating the refugee crisis in order to
destabilize the EU. That is part of Russia's hybrid war," says
German parliamentarian Niels Annen, foreign policy spokesman for the
Social Democrats (SPD).
It has become
increasingly clear that Russia is not a partner in the fight against
Islamic State, as some in Europe had hoped. Rather, Russia is an
adversary that is willing to achieve its goals by way of violence if
necessary.
How, then, should
Europe deal with the unpredictable ruler in the Kremlin? Should it
talk to Putin or fight him? What are the consequences of American
reticence for Europe? And how can this five-year tragedy be brought
to an end? Is there still a solution at all beyond Bashar Assad?
The Foreign Ministry
in Moscow is a combination of Russia's historical pride and its
new-found self-confidence. The tip of the Stalin-era structure still
juts darkly into the winter sky, just as it always has, but the
facade of the right-hand wing shines with a fresh gloss. Deputy
Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov, whose portfolio includes Syria,
receives visitors on the fifth floor.
The Middle East,
Gatilov says, will continue to be a focus of Russian foreign policy
for years to come. He believes that Moscow has a particular
responsibility for the region and that Russia is "geographically
and historically closer" to Middle Eastern countries and that
"we understand their mentality better than the West may do. At
least we have never tried to force our will on the people there."
The comment was aimed at Washington. But in the Syrian drama, Moscow
has another significant adversary: Turkey. The ambitions of Recep
Tayyip Erdogan are dangerous and the West must finally recognize that
fact, Gatilov says.
Would Moscow suspend
its bombing campaign during cease-fire negotiations as a gesture of
goodwill? Gatilov shakes his head: No, the airstrikes must continue,
"even in the event of a cease-fire. The logic of a cease-fire
includes all those who have a real interest in negotiations, but it
does not include terrorists."
The Russian
Offensive
There are currently
around 3,000 Russian troops stationed in the province of Latakia on
Syria's coast and Russian jets have flown roughly 7,300 sorties since
the end of September. During daylight hours, a Sukhoi warplane takes
off from the Hmeymim air base about every 20 minutes and the
Kremlin-controlled media releases claims of success daily: "The
terrorists have sustained heavy losses in Aleppo!" and "More
and more volunteers are joining Assad!" Footage of advancing
Assad units is accompanied by hymnal choir music.
But because the
troops loyal to Assad -- which have long been made up primarily of
Iranians and Lebanese -- are in reality only advancing slowly, they
are now being supported by Russian troops. That looks to be the case
from video footage from northwestern Syria that has been analyzed by
Russian activists belonging to the Conflict Intelligence Team. One
video shows a Russian-speaking officer who is observing the
battlefield. Another shows Msta-B artillery pieces, a weapon that
Assad's army has never possessed. Russian commands can be heard:
"Number two, ready. Fire!"
The Russian
offensive managed to achieve more in just a few days than the Assad
regime had in the years that preceded it -- and has also reduced
Tehran's influence in Syria. Putin is now the most powerful man in
Damascus and he appears to be following a strategy similar to the one
he once employed in Chechnya: destroy everything until there are no
more people left, there is no more resistance and no political
alternative. Then he is free to install a leader of his choosing.
The West has been
observing the consequential brutality of Putin's new foreign policy
strategy with a mixture of awe, indignation and horror. Yet it is a
strategy that has long since been outlined in Putin's speeches or in
the papers of Kremlin-allied think tanks. Retired General Leonid
Ivashov, once a high-ranking Defense Ministry official and now the
president of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems in Moscow, weeks
ago declared 2016 to be a decisive year "in which Russia takes a
leading role in the Middle East, thereby challenging the West and
reestablishing its civilizing determination. Russia is becoming an
independent geo-political actor." He says that Russia has
redefined its goals and will distance itself from the West, thereby
breaking America's dominant role. The Middle East, he believes, will
be the focus of conflict.
Putin would never
say such a thing openly, but it seems likely that he is thinking in a
similar vein. He has never been particularly shy about pursuing his
foreign policy vision. He showed as much in Georgia in 2008 and then
again in the Ukraine crisis. Now, its Syria's turn.
Merkel 'Horrified by
Human Suffering'
That's why it is
naïve for senior German politicians, like Social Democrat head and
Vice Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel or Horst Seehofer, head of Bavaria's
Christian Social Union -- the sister party to Chancellor Angela
Merkel's Christian Democrats -- to dabble in foreign policy by
meeting with Putin in the hope that he might help solve Germany's and
Europe's problems. The East-West dialogue that they allegedly wanted
to restart has been continuing the entire time. But Putin has never
rewarded attempts at mediation, preferring instead to use Moscow
visits by Western politicians for his own domestic political
propaganda. If anything, Putin is more affected by unambiguous
criticism from Merkel, who recently said she is "horrified by
the human suffering caused by the air raids, particularly from the
Russian side." The Kremlin immediately and brusquely rejected
the critique, an indication that such words are not without effect.
NATO too has
recently changed its strategy when it comes to dealing with Putin.
The Western alliance is currently preparing an operation in the fight
against migrant smugglers in the Aegean and intends to station
additional troops in its eastern member states. The plans are to be
completed prior to the NATO summit scheduled for the beginning of
July, with up to 1,000 troops to be sent to each of the eastern
alliance members. Both objectives are primarily to be understood as
messages to Putin: NATO is taking action on both the refugee crisis
and in response to eastern provocations. An old Cold War term has
taken on new life in the debate: deterrence.
But with the
intensified air war against Islamic State in Syria, the danger of a
direct confrontation with Russia has also increased. There have been
repeated airspace violations in recent months, with the Turkish
shooting down of a Russian military jet in November marking the most
severe incident.
Ankara refrained at
the time from asking for help from the alliance. But should Russian
provocations continue, the Turkish government could invoke Article 5
of the North Atlantic Treaty, which holds that an attack on one or
more members of the alliance is an attack on the alliance as a whole.
Should that come to pass, the Western alliance would find itself on
the brink of a military confrontation with Russia.
And the situation in
Aleppo could trigger the kind of escalation between the West and
Russia that hasn't been seen in decades.
Currently, refugees
from Aleppo and its surroundings are now camping out at exactly the
place where this danger is at its greatest: on the border between
Syria and Turkey. Tens of thousands of people have fled the Russian
airstrikes in recent days, including many women and children, poor
people, the elderly and the sick. Most of them possess little more
than the clothes on their backs and for many, it is not the first
time they have fled the violence of the civil war.
The tents set up on
the Syrian side of the border by Turkish and international aid
agencies have long since filled up. Instead, people are sleeping on
cardboard out in the open, despite the rain and cold. Most of them
want to get out of Syria as quickly as they can. But the Turkish
military has closed the border, only allowing the sick and injured to
pass. Soldiers are patrolling between the checkpoints and tanks roll
down the streets while in the distance, explosions can be heard and
columns of smoke can be seen.
"Here alone, we
need at least an additional 1,500 tents. We have no sanitary
facilities and not enough food," says the manager of the refugee
camp at the Bab Al-Salameh ("Gate of Peace") border
crossing. "Some 60,000 people who previously fled live in our
camp and in seven additional camps. All schools and mosques are full
of people. It is cold, it's raining. We need help!"
Dozens of refugees
are camped out on a bit of unused land on the Turkish side of the
border, not far from the city of Kilis. Waled Kabso, a 66-year-old
mathematics teacher from Tall Rifaat, a town just north of Aleppo, is
squatting on a blanket. He came with his daughter, whose son was
injured and who is now receiving treatment in Kilis. His wife and 11
other children remain stuck in Syria. Kabso takes a mobile phone out
of his jacket pocket and tries to reach his family, but is unable to.
"Erdogan says we Syrians are his brothers, but why isn't he
helping us?"
'Erdogan Fears Kurds
More than Assad or IS'
Turkey has already
absorbed over 2.5 million refugees, but Erdogan no longer wants to
take any more Syrians into the country. His reasoning has more to do
with forcing political concessions from Europe than with fears that
his country will be overwhelmed. Although Brussels has approved €3
billion in aid to Ankara for dealing with the refugee crisis in the
country, Turkish politicians have been saying for some time now that
they consider this sum to be too low.
The escalation of
the conflict also provides Erdogan with the opportunity to push ahead
with a plan he has long embraced: the establishment of a buffer zone
in northern Syria as a place he can send refugees back to. More
important than providing a safe zone for refugees, however, doing so
would help Erdogan stop the advance of the Kurds. Erdogan himself has
been one of the biggest losers in the Syrian drama. For years, he
supported some of the rebels in their campaign against Assad, but
with prospects of the Syrian dictator's ouster slipping, Erdogan's
ultimate nightmare could actually come true -- the formation of a
Kurdish proto-state located directly on the border, governed by
allies of the banned Kurdish Workers' Party (PKK). "Erdogan
fears the Kurds more than Assad or the IS," says Evren Cevik,
the foreign policy spokesman for the pro-Kurdish HDP party in Turkey.
The Kurds have been
most adept at positioning themselves in the complex Syrian conflict.
They are aligned with the West against Islamic State and, more
recently, increasingly with the Russians as well. Last Wednesday, the
Kurdish-Syrian PYD opened its second international representation
office on the outskirts of Moscow. So far, the liaison office is
comprised only of a telephone, a conference table and two dozen
chairs, but one need look no further than at one of the most
high-profile guests at the opening reception to gauge the magnitude
of the outpost's symbolic impact: none other than Alexander Borodai,
who rose to international prominence as the "prime minister"
of the self-proclaimed "Donetsk People's Republic," a
veteran of Moscow's hybrid warfare.
On the same night of
the opening, Syrian Kurds captured the Minnigh air base, located
between Aleppo and the Turkish border, following Russian airstrikes
and advances by Assad-aligned troops. The Kurds deny they are
fighting alongside the regime, but all indications suggest there is
some form of cooperation.
The greatest risk
right now, though, is that of a direct confrontation between Turkey
and Russia. After Turkey shot down the Russian warplane in November,
Moscow moved to increase air defenses so heavily in Syria that it
would now be extremely difficult for Ankara to intervene in the
hostilities taking place next door. There are nevertheless rumors
that Turkey could be preparing for an invasion with ground forces.
This week, Turkey sought to dispel such speculation that it was
considering a solo ground effort, instead asking the US and other
allies to form a coalition for a joint ground operation to bring
hostilities in Syria to an end.
But what would
happen if a Turkish aid convoy were to be attacked by Russian fighter
jets? Or if the Russians armed the Kurds with anti-aircraft missiles
-- and these were then used to shoot down a Turkish jet? Or if Turkey
were to provide the rebels with these weapons which they could then
use to target Russian jets? Would NATO have to intervene at that
point?
Obama's Silence
The man who could
answer many of these questions is saying very little these days about
Syria, despite the recent drama. In the past, Barack Obama has said
that Assad must step down and he still refers to him as "a
brutal, ruthless dictator." At the same time, though, Obama is
doing nothing to counter him and there are no signs that he has
anything up his sleeve either.
The New York Times
recently wrote that it is difficult to distinguish between Putin's
and Obama's Syria strategies. Meanwhile, historian and journalist
Michael Ignatieff and Brookings Institution fellow Leon Wieseltier
lamented in the Washington Post, "It's time for those who care
about the moral standing of the United States to say that this policy
is shameful."
It is very clear at
this point that the US has no strategy beyond its half-hearted
efforts to provide training and arms to rebels -- and to otherwise
rely on negotiations. But none of this has born any fruit, as events
in early February demonstrated.
Secretary of State
Kerry worked for three months to get the warring parties to a
negotiating table under the auspices of the United Nations --
moderate rebels, representatives of the regime, Iranians, Saudi
Arabians and Russians. But Moscow then turned around and launched its
offensive right as the talks began. Within 48 hours, the Russian air
force carried out 320 airstrikes in northern Syria alone. It was no
coincidence that the storm on Aleppo began at that exact moment. The
aim was that of destroying any possibility that the opposition would
have a say in Syria's future.
"All sides were
aware that a continuation of the talks would become increasingly
difficult for the opposition as the regime intensified its military
offensive," diplomats in Geneva said. After two days, the UN
mediator Staffan de Mistura suspended talks. Right now, it doesn't
look as though the opposition will be prepared to return to Geneva on
Feb. 25 as planned. And why should they?
Assad's 'Core Syria'
Strategy
Assad's aim right
now is to capture militarily a kind of "core Syria," in
which the majority of the population lives. If successful, he will be
able to negotiate from a position of strength and dictate the
conditions, which are certain not to include his resignation.
At a reception held
during the Syria donors conference in London at the beginning of
February, three human rights activists from Syria asked Kerry why the
US hasn't done anything to ensure the protection of the civilians.
The secretary of state countered: "Don't blame me, blame your
opposition."
"Kerry was
really angry," one of the women, who wishes to remain anonymous,
recalls. "He said the opposition should have accepted what they
were capable of getting. We replied that the Russians had dropped 230
bombs on Aleppo on a single day. He corrected us by saying it had
only been 180. Then he said, 'These airstrikes will continue for
three more months. The opposition will be decimated.' And he said it
would be their fault and not that of the Russians."
Has Obama Given Up
Hope?
When Putin
intervened in Syria, Obama seemed to give up any hope of being able
to solve the crisis in the Middle East, if he hadn't already. He is
afraid of a confrontation with the Russians, but he is also concerned
because he needs Moscow to ensure that the nuclear deal with Iran is
a success.
The US government
will not expand its involvement, argues Hardin Lang of the Center for
American Progress, a think tank with close ties to the current
administration. Lang says Assad's removal is but a distant prospect
now and that it would be hard to imagine how a transfer of power
between Assad and a new government could work anytime in the near
future. "The world looks different today than it did only three
or four months ago," he says.
Currently, Obama's
Syria strategy consists almost entirely of fighting Islamic State. In
contrast to Assad, whom he views simply as being an annoying
dictator, the president sees Islamic State as a threat to US national
security.
In addition to
airstrikes, this strategy also includes an emphasis on supporting
Kurdish operations. More than 50 special forces are operating in
northern Syria and Iraq right now in support of the Kurds. The
strategy is proving effective, even if only slowly, with the area
under IS control having been reduced by one-third. But this has also
entailed a bizarre division of labor: The US is bombing IS in the
east of Syria while Assad and Putin recapture the rest of the
country. To many Syrians, that looks a lot like cooperation.
At the same time, in
order to force the rebels to the table at the failed talks in Geneva,
the US ceased providing military aid to rebel groups and also
pressured its allies to do the same. The rebels, who are fighting
against Assad, but also against IS, are embittered, angry and
desperate. "How could Obama have been so naïve to believe that
all he had to do was cordially invite Putin or Assad?" asks a
perplexed Ismail Naddaf, of Aleppo's Fatah Brigade. "America
never wanted to topple Assad. They wanted negotiations, but that was
illusory. Assad doesn't negotiate."
'Looking on as We
Get Massacred'
Abd Alsalm Hmedi, a
former fighter pilot from Aleppo who defected to the Free Syrian Army
in 2012, also feels abandoned. "You cheered on the revolution,
but now you are just looking on as we get massacred by Assad and the
Russians," he says. Like many moderate rebels, he has the
feeling that the predictions made long ago by radicals are now coming
true: that America is betraying them. Some fighters will now join
forces with IS and many will turn to the Nusra Front, part of
al-Qaida.
Diplomacy too has
its price, particularly when it fails. The price of Western passivity
is the endless suffering of people in Syria, the strengthening of
Putin, divisions in Europe and the rise of the radicals.
And yet, there were
opportunities in the past five years for steering events in Syria
down a different path. The West, especially the United States, could
have been more resolute in its support of the rebels and provided
them with the necessary equipment. It could have implemented and
enforced a no-fly zone in parts of the country, giving countless
people the possibility of staying in the country rather than fleeing.
And Washington should have followed up on its threat that there would
be consequences if the "red line" of a chemical weapons
attack were crossed, as happened on August 21, 2013. Such a response
could have come in the form of targeted military strikes against
regime positions and military bases.
Back then, it still
wasn't too late.
Playing Chicken with
Moscow
If the West were to
conduct a military intervention today in order to prevent further
tragedy in Aleppo, the risk of a direct confrontation with Russia
would be considerable. Despite that threat, an increasing number of
observers are calling for action. If the US and NATO allow the siege
of Aleppo to proceed, they will be "complicit in crimes of war,"
Ignatieff and Wieseltier wrote in the Washington Post. "Aleppo
is an emergency, requiring emergency measures." It is also an
opportunity, they wrote, "perhaps the last one, to save Syria."
Their plan calls for
the US, with the use of its naval and air assets and under the NATO
umbrella, to establish a no-fly zone from Aleppo to the Turkish
border -- and make clear it will be defended. There is, of course, a
threat of a confrontation with Russia, but that is in no way a
foregone conclusion, especially given that the US Air Force is
already in constant contact with the Russian military about its
operations in Syria. If the price of intervention gets even higher
for Putin, he would likely be more prepared to make concessions, they
write. That "may set the stage for a tough and serious
negotiation to bring an end to the slaughter."
Saudi Arabia has
already announced that it wants to send in ground troops, prompting
Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev to warn on Thursday that boots
on the ground could spark a "world war." However, there is
nothing to indicate that the United States has any plans to lead an
invasion army -- at least not for the remainder of Obama's final
term. In all likelihood, though, starting in 2017, a more strongly
interventionist president will reside in the White House. But by
then, Assad may have won. It's a victory that would result in many,
many losers.
Almost all of the
rebels and most of the refugees are part of the Sunni majority.
Middle East expert Nicholas Heras, from the Center for a New American
Security, believes that changing the country's demographics is a
cornerstone of Assad's strategy. "The Assad regime has a clear
devastation and depopulation strategy," he recently told
BuzzFeed. "Both the Assad regime and Russia understand full well
that in order to win the war, they have to destroy the local
communities that give the rebel movement support." If some
rebels then join al-Qaida or Islamic State, that could even benefit
Assad because it will increase the willingness to see the Syrian
president as the lesser of two evils. Yet that would not mark a
return to the pre-2011 Syria, nor would it establish the security and
stability necessary for a return of the refugees. The hate is too
strong, the destruction too vast and the fear of revenge and
persecution by Assad's secret services too great. The remaining
rebels may just continue fighting in a bitter war of attrition.
As the situation
currently stands, people will continue to die. People like
canary-breeder Juma al-Najar, 45, his wife and 18-year-old daughter.
When the Russian airstrikes began, they fled their hometown of Maraa,
located between Aleppo and the Turkish border. A week ago Monday,
they returned in the hopes of soon being able to escape to Turkey,
but on Tuesday, a bomb dropped by a Russian jet hit their house. Only
their legs, arms and heads remained, quickly buried in six plastic
bags.
People will continue
to be wounded. People like the grandchildren of the farmer's wife
Fatima al-Dik in the village of Ratyan. They were hit by a missile
and are now fighting for their lives in a hospital in Kilis. Or
people like the 82-year-old great-grandmother Fattum Kaddour, who has
now, for the second time, been pulled out of the rubble of her bombed
out home in Aleppo. She has now managed to flee to the Turkish
border. "I wish I were dead," she says.
The horror simply
continues, like in Aleppo, where two children were just recently torn
apart by Russian bombs in front of their school. The school is in a
basement, because it is at least halfway safe underground. The story
is told by a former law student named Zuhair, who organizes classes
in seven Aleppo schools. "Entire city quarters have emptied out;
teachers have fled as have many families. And that even though the
border is closed and nobody knows where they might be safe.
Everywhere I look, I see fear in people's faces."
On Monday, Feb. 7,
several bombs fell on a street in the residential Aleppo district of
Sakhour, he recalls. "It was terrible. There were body parts
lying all over, here a hand, there a head, a foot, a torso. And
people just kept walking, hardly any of them looked shocked and
nobody stopped," Zuhair says. "Have we become monsters? Or
is that our way of staying normal amid the lunacy that surrounds us?"
By Benjamin Bidder,
Katrin Kuntz, Juliane von Mittelstaedt, Christian Neef, Maximilian
Popp, Christoph Reuter, Mathieu von Rohr, Christoph Schult, Holger
Stark, Wladimir van Wilgenburg and Bernhard Zand
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário