France, Russia, the West and the Syrian Question

Photo credit: photonews.com.pk

Both France and Russia were present fighting ISIS in Iraq and Syria long before the terrorist attack’s in France’s capital. France, as part of Operation Chammal, had been bombing ISIS-occupied Iraq as part of the US-led coalition. Russia, providing trainers and intelligence, as well as weapons to Assad was also present on the ground indirectly fighting terrorists – among whom ISIS. The recent escalation of military means by both countries (for the former as a response to the terror attacks and for the latter as a means to retain influence and the upper hand in the Middle East) presents new problems as to how they should cooperate and how to beat the Islamic State. More generally, the West’s point of view as to cooperation with Russia is changing, as a more pragmatic standpoint is adopted in seeking to destroy ISIS – irrespective of, or less concerned by ‘morality’, which was France and the US’s standpoint. Hence the disagreement with Russia over Assad, and the plans to strike Assad after evidence for gassing his own people was confirmed.

While an increase in military action is not a solution for the prevention of terrorist attacks at home (indeed the Bataclan murderers were partly French-born, and radicalised in Belgium through the internet – an issue which screams for social and religious reform rather than a purely military issue) in order to have a permeable, lasting military effect on the ground, cooperation with Russia is indeed what needs to be found. Whether that is within the US’s coalition, headquartered in Qatar, or simply through mutual assistance, bringing together all involved parties is the only efficient way to rid ourselves of this scourge. While this has been seen on a political level (Vladimir Putin ordered its own missile cruiser Moskva to treat France as allies when the Charles de Gaulle would arrive within the vicinity of Syria) in Hollande’s trips to Washington and Moscow, on a military level the reluctance of individual countries’ top brass to budge is clear. France’s Chief of General Staff speaks of mutual understanding and cordiality with his Russian counterpart, but what has been seen on the ground is close US-France cooperation not the Russian flotilla sailing next to the France’s (which for the record will include British, Belgian and German escorts – it is very much Europe’s flotilla) . Indeed, after a brief contact the Moskva and the Charles de Gaulle battle-groups pursued their own aims, and the only cooperation seen involved plans for an ‘on-board visit’ of the Moskva. The only concrete military plan is for French destroyers to join up with American aircraft carriers: a regular occurrence between two allies with the same military philosophy with regards to aircraft carrier use.

While Russia was the first country to seek a multi-national coalition, integrating all from Canada to Israel and even Iran, versus ISIS more than two years ago, it is time for France and the West to seek further cooperation with the Russian military. Any reluctance on a political level stems from Cold-War memories and the Ukraine crisis; a purely pragmatic approach – destroy ISIS – does not mean countries will forsake a political solution to the Ukraine crisis. On a military level, the lack of will to cooperate, stemming from military inflexibility with respects to the Russians will deprive the West’s warriors of more than 30 high-performance aircraft and a substantial number of troops and tech in Syria itself: a real vantage position. “Improvise, adapt, overcome” may have to be put to use with the Russians, not against them.

Winning the war versus ISIS in Syria, therefore, will require more effort, on all levels, but especially military. While the consequences of the war in Syria will be almost impossible to deal with successfully (the parties currently involved all have different aims and back different parties in Syria itself) there is still hope – as there was at the end of the Second World War as to post-Hitler Germany – if our single aim is the destruction of evil, in this case ISIS. We will surely need a Yalta-type conference (perhaps not in the now Russian Crimean city itself) to sort post-ISIS Syria and Iraq out, and the Middle East’s borders will surely be forever changed, but the only way to get to that stage and prevent an evil institution fester and poison the world is greater, unilateral cooperation. And this means with Russia, its allies and interests taken into consideration, whether the West likes it or not.