Too late for Obama to change course on Syria

The leaked US State Department internal memo, signed by more than 50 rank and file diplomats, has been described, especially by right-wing media pundits, as the sternest rebuke of the Obama administration policy on Syria. 

Last week The Wall Street Journal revealed that the diplomats had urged the United States to carry out military strikes against the regime of President Bashar Assad to stop its continued violations in the five-year-old civil war.

Furthermore, the diplomats called for “a judicious use of stand-off and air weapons, which would undergird and drive a more focused and hard-nosed US-led diplomatic process”.

This is an unusual situation and it is certainly unprecedented in US diplomatic history. The internal dissent memo is indeed a sort of an indictment of the Obama policy in Syria, which many, including US Democrats, and Arab and regional allies of the United States see as shortsighted and insufficient. 

One thing is for sure, and that is the situation in Syria has changed little since the outbreak of the popular uprising there in 2011, which soon turned into a bloody civil war, with foreign powers taking sides and fuelling more violence that so far has claimed the lives of 400,000 people and resulted in the worst refugee crisis in modern history.

Despite the rebuke, it is naïve to believe that President Obama will cave in and embrace a new approach on Syria. He has chosen not to get involved directly, arguing that there is no military solution to the Syrian conflict. 

Even when the Damascus regime was accused of using chemical weapons in 2013, killing 1,400 people, which was seen as crossing the red line that the US president had drawn a year earlier, the White House backed down and critics accused Obama of blinking first.

US policy on Syria remains vague today, even as Washington leads a coalition against Daesh in both Syria and Iraq. Removing Assad from power does not appear to be a priority for the administration. Instead, the president has sent Special Forces to Syria to train and guide Kurdish forces as they attempt to recapture Daesh-held territory. 

The US continues to back the Free Syrian Army, whose military fortunes have diminished compared to more extreme groups such as Al Qaeda proxy Al Nusra Front and other Islamist rebels.  

The Obama policy has changed little following Russian military intervention in Syria last October. Washington was critical of Moscow’s involvement but did little to oppose it. Instead, the two sides began coordinating to pave the way for a political solution. 

Despite all the meetings and indirect negotiations, nothing concrete has come out of initial peace talks. These talks remain suspended.

America’s ambiguity on Syria has bolstered Assad’s position. It is obvious that he is not taking peace talks seriously and does not believe in a political solution. 

Instead, he and his allies, Hizbollah and Iran, have relied on Russian air cover to fight rebels in Idlib, the Damascus countryside, Homs and Aleppo. Aside from liberating Palmyra two months ago from Daesh, there haven’t been other major military victories. 

And in the past few days, Assad’s campaign to retake Aleppo has suffered a big setback as Hizbollah lost between 40 to 50 fighters; its biggest loss in years. Iran too had lost tens of its fighters in the Aleppo region in the past few weeks.

Obama’s objectives in Syria are short term, in line with the remaining few months of his presidency. He is not about to change course now, and his hope is that the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces, with the help of US Special Forces, will able to recapture Raqqa, the self-declared capital of Daesh, before he leaves office in January. 

The focus of US strategy in Syria and Iraq is the military defeat of Daesh with no vision of what should follow next, especially with regard to Assad and the future of Syria.

The call for US air strikes against the Assad regime is both unrealistic and risky at this time. 

For starters, Russia’s engagement in Syria and its commitment to Assad will make it difficult, and dangerous, for the US to change gears at this stage. Such a move would have made sense three years ago. 

It is important to think about the future of Syria if and when Assad is removed. At present, there is no acceptable alternative, and the main players today, Al Nusra and its allies, constitute a worse choice for the Syrian people. 

And even the Russians are coming to grips with the fact that a military conclusion to the conflict is impossible and that eventually, most parties will have to sit and negotiate. Perhaps this realisation will vindicate the Obama policy eventually. 

Unfortunately, the price that Syrians have paid is too high to bear. Moreover, even if the carnage stops and a political path is open, there are no guarantees that Syria, as a country, can be salvaged.

Osama Al Sharif is a journalist and political commentator based in Amman.