Russian President Vladimir Putin. © Alexei Druzhinin / RIA Novosti
Shane Harris & Nancy A. Youssef, Daily Beast: U.S. Spies Root for an ISIS-Russia War
Six U.S. intelligence and military officials tell The Daily Beast that they hope an apparent ISIS attack on Metrojet Flight 9268 would force Putin to finally take the gloves off.
In the days following the crash of Russian Metrojet Flight 9268, which mounting evidence suggests was felled by an ISIS bomb, many U.S. intelligence and security officials weren’t panicking about the so-called Islamic State unleashing a new campaign of attacks on civilian airliners. Instead, they were wondering how the bombing might hurt Vladimir Putin, and potentially help the United States.
Ever since Putin started dropping bombs on militants in Syria, officials have privately been arguing that the Russian leader committed a major strategic blunder, and that his intervention in Syria would weaken both his military and his reputation and likely ignite a backlash from Islamist militants, who have attacked inside Russia in the past.
One U.S. intelligence official, speaking prior to the airliner crash, called the Russian campaign in Syria “Putin’s folly.”
WNU Editor: Russia has been at war against Islamic militants long before the U.S. got involved in these conflicts. And while I can understand that some in the U.S. are probably hoping that Syria will be a Russian quagmire and hell-hole .... the reality is that it is the U.S. that has been in a quagmire in the Middle East for the past few years.
5 comments:
The U.S. officials quoted in the article are engaged in silly wishful thinking. I agree with WNU editor concerning this and would add the following:
1. ISIS and al Qaida will attack Russia no matter what Russia does. They attack Russia because Russia exists, not because of any particular policy Russia has or action Russia takes. ISIS and al Qaida attack the West for the same reasons.
2.Putin has carefully tailored, narrow goals in Syria. In my view. those goals are:
a. Bases. Russia now has bases on the Med, conveniently near the Suez Canal. Russia wants to keep them.
b. Russia needs local territory to shield its bases. Latakia is that territory. Conveniently, the Alawites share the goal of keeping ISIS and the other rebels out. ISIS would be delighted to behead every Alawite they can. The Russians can help the Alawites survive, and in exchange Russia keeps its bases.
c. Russia foresees the partition of Syria. In that partition, Russia cares only for goals a and b above. If the rump of Syria controls territory in addition to Latakia, so much the better, but which additional territory, and how much, is of little concern to Russia.
d. The Syrian state is running out of men and will to fight. Russian intervention props them up and strengthens their position in advance of partition.
e. Whether Assad or his family rule Syria, or rump Syria, or Latakia, is of little concern to Russia.
f. Once Russia has its redoubt in Latakia, Russia can allow the civil war to proceed indefinitely, with no particular stake in the outcome.
g. Iran and Hezbollah share interests with Russia, but their interests diverge later, once Syria is partitioned. That possible disagreement is not ripe.
3. Russia's intervention has been disciplined and designed to support Russia's narrow, almost modest goals outlined above. Russia need not conquer all of the territory controlled by any of the rebel groups, including ISIS, to attain its goals. Russia is not trying (a) to put Syria back together again as a unitary state, nor (b) to defeat ISIS, nor (c) to defeat al Qaida, nor (d) to establish a democracy in Syria, nor (e) to help Syrians persecuted by ISIS, nor (f) to control which rebel group rules those parts of Syria Russia does not control. None of this is folly or necessarily a quagmire for Russia.
Thank you for your comment Publius. Could not have said it any better.
Hope is a strategy you have, when you elect Democrats every 4 or 8 years.
Publius,
Yes, I agree.
If Putin wins a few more battles I think he'll call for a conference on the political settlement of Syria (what's left of what we know). He's effectively isolated the US, their allies, and their aligned rebels. With Assad as his bargaining chip (retained as a figurehead) he'll keep his bases and leave ISIS to the open desert. It'll work at least in the short term, but with all government agencies in the area penetrated by ISIS the long term would be iffy.
"g. Iran and Hezbollah share interests with Russia, but their interests diverge later, once Syria is partitioned. That possible disagreement is not ripe." this is why I say the cruise missile launch from the Caspian was a message to the Iranians.
Putin knows that in the end his real fight and danger with Islam lies in the former SSR republics of central asia. He's established bases deep on their western front, will it pay? We'll see.
Should read western flank, not front.
Post a Comment