• am
  • ru
  • en
print version
04.12.2012

WAR IN SYRIA: PROBABLE SCENARIOS

EnglishРуский

   

Gagik Harutyunyan
Executive Director of “Noravank” Foundation

Military and political processes going on in the Middle East and especially in Syria in the context of “Arab spring” are mostly discussed in the Armenian media from the point of view of the security of the Armenian communities. Of course this issue is the most topical today, and the security of the communities is one of the crucial goals of our national security. In this connection we state that unlike 2003 when after the occupation of Iraq by the U.S. troops the local Armenian community in fact broke up, today Armenia tends to help the Armenians from Syria, who were up against the wall, to the best of its ability – about 5000 compatriots left for Armenia; they were provided with necessary conditions as far as possible, schooling for the children was organized.

At the same time processes in Syria influence the security of Armenia either. Sometimes the necessary attention is not paid to this circumstance, which is partially conditioned by the policy conducted by some media. Such broadcasting channels as CNN, Euronews, BBC, RBC and others, as a rule, present the situation unilaterally; they characterize the “Arab spring” as the revolutionary events conditioned by excluxively domestic political circumstances. Particularly, difficult situation in Syria is presented as a simple struggle between governmental forces (which are accused of violence in regard to the civilian population) and opposition which is “fighting for the democracy”. Meanwhile, not only regional but also much bigger geopolitical actors, which tend to implement their strategic goals, are involved in the developments proceeding in the country. Thus, it can be stated that apparent local war in Syria in reality is a flash point of a global confrontation.

Reasons for the war

The structure of today’s Middle East, according to the geopolitical architects who formed it, among other issues should serve one main purpose – there should be no centers of state and poitical will in the region which can jeopardize the political or economic interests of the U.S. or its ally Israel1. It should be stated that this programme is consistenly being implemented which is particularly proved by the precendents of Iraq and Libya, where maximum two months were needed to overthrow the existing regimes. However, the main oppositioners to this programme carried out in the region – Iran and Syria2, despite the sanctions imposed against the first one and factual war declared agaist Syria, have preserved their independence and national and state structure typical for them for about 2 years. Of course, this situation is not only a result of the will, resources and systemtized policy of the authorities and societies of these states. Here the crucial point is that in this conflict Iran and Syria are supported by the geopolitical heavyweights – Russia and China. It can be stated that for the first time after the Cold war systematized opposition is offered to the West. Of course it is early days to speak about global West-East confrontation, but in the Syrian war in case of intensification of current tendencies possibility of such scenario appears. In this context it should not be even excluded that Chinese-Japanese disagreement on disputable islands is preliminarily developed action which aim is to restrain China creating regional problems and to deflect attention of the super-power from the Middle East3. It is obvious that deterioration of the Chinese-Japanese relations is very topical: in particular it is suffice to remember that several years ago the idea of creation of the Asian NATO, which had to include, besides these two powers, both Koreas either. But let’s get back to the current developments.

Parties to a conflict

Descritopin and analysis of the parties involved in the military encoutners in Syria, their military and political reasons, confessional and ethnic factors are a subjec to a bigger study. On this assumption we shall try to present the realities briefly, taking as a ground today's information sources.

The so-called Syrian free army (SFA), which is positioned by the media as the representatives of opposition, mainly cosists of hirelings from Afghanistan, Libya and other Arab countries and even Azerbaijan, part of whom are the members of radical Islmist terrorist organizations. Anyway, according to the assessment of numerous foreing experts and Syrians, the Syrian citizens are the minority in this army4. The SFA which comprises such ill-assorted masses is naturally far from being integrated organization and has no central command. The same can be said in regard to the political structure of the Syrian opposition – Syrian National Assembly. At the same time decentralization is some kind of advantage for the hirelings, because this makes their actions even more unexpected. In addition, the radical Islamists fighting with the SFA commit suicides; it is known that it is almost impossible to fight effectively this type of terrorism particularly in the Syrian conditions.

The number of rebels according to different sources varies from 30 to 70 thousand. They are funded and supplied with arms mainly by Wahhabi tandem – Saudi Arabia and Qatar. The hirelings receive intelligence, mitary and other support also from the special services of NATO member countries (particularly from U.S., Great Britain, Turkey and France).

Anti-governmental forces receive especially big support from Turkey where most of the hirelings took military training before being sent to Syria. Turkish military factually participate in combat actions in Syria and not only in the form of reconnaissance flights and shellings of the Syrian territory; it is suffice to mention that about 12 thousand hirelings in Syria were managed by Turkish officers5. There is information confirmed by Turkish sources that Turkish general and about 30 military advisers were captured in Syria6.

Some analysts tend to believe that Turkey can arrange larg-scale invasion in Syria and this opinion was substantiated by the decision of Turkish majlis to initiate military actions against this country. But this measure is connected with many international, domestic and, taking into consideration good qualification of the Syrian army, military difficulties. Currently implemented “strategy of exhaustion” is much more efficient than simple invasion. At the same time large-scale Turkish attack on Syria cannot be fully excluded: it is possible in the context of U.S.-NATO collective military actions7. However we will additionally refer to this issue.

The Syrian army (according to pre-war data its number was 320 thousand) fighting against the SFA is not acting alone either. According to numerous sources Iran renders military and material support to Bashar Assad’s regime. In accordance with some mass media, soldiers of special forces of that country (very often the Army of the Guardians of Islamic Revolution is mentioned) are directly involved in the combat actions. Iran is a party of the conflict in the Syrian war. There is also unconfirmed reports concerning the presence of the Russian military advisors in Syria. Among the countries which supply milltary equipments and ammunition to Syria are Russia, partially China; North Korea, with which Assad’s regime traditionally maintans ties, is also mentioned. Syria is traditionally supported by some Arab countries (especially by Shiite authorities of Iraq) and Shiite organizations either. On the assumption of current situation Kurdish alignments has stirred up. In Syria where about 2 million Kurds live they demand autonomy but at the same time they figth against the SFA8. Taking into consideration the fact that in Turkey Kurd guerillas are fighting regular Turkish army, it should be accepted that at least at this stage Kurds support Syrian governmental forces. It is characterictic that in every single situation the governmental forces overrule the hirelings. It allows some experts to believe that Syrian army can emerge victorious in this confrontation9. In gerenal, however, current situation consistently contaminate Syrian state and social-economic system; the normal mode of life in all the districts of the country has been shuttered; there are dozens of thousands victims and the number of the refugees goes beyond 200 thousand. Under the current circumstances it is very difficult to make any predictions, but let us try to consider schematically several scenarios of possible developments.

Possible developments and scenarios

According to the information flows, Iran and Russia make attempts to find ways of stopping confrontation through different negotiation formats; even Assad’s resignation and creation of transitional government are considered. But the West and regional actors which believe that time is on their side do no respond to these attempts and find unacceptable controled authorities in Syria10. Let us mention that from purely military point of view a kind of dynamic balance has been created in Syria: the governmental forces using air force, armor and artillery manage to supress the enemy in definite districts, but at the same time new groups of hirelings armed with the newest anti-aircraft and anti-tank arms penetrate into the country; these groups expand the geography and targets of the attacks. It seems if current tendencies preserve and new unexpected circumstances do not arouse, such war may last for quite a long time.

But alongside with “hot war” a “cold war” is conducted against Syria and Iran – in the form of economic sanctions and information and psychological influence (and “Al Jazeera” TV channel is very active in this regard) which purpose is to shatter the state and social-economic grounds of these states. In consequence Iran and Syria face serious problems especially in economic area, but it is too early to speak about collapse of rather flexible Iranian economy. As a result a situation has been created which has lasted for 2 years and which needs to be solved.

The aforementioned intervention of NATO forces headed by the U.S. in Syria can be considered as one of the scenarios of possible developements. Such policy can solve only military goals: after missile and air strikes the governmental forces probably would lose the edge and the hirelings can possibly capture Damascus with the support of the Turkish army. Let us also mention that such a scenario which evades UN decisions will be considered as a direct challenge to China and Russia and can cause military and political rapproachment of these powers in the face of “common enemy”. This is very undesirable but nevertheless possible strategic prospect. Today direct response of Iran, which will take intervention as the beginning of an inevitable war against itself, is more essential. It can cause the situation when struggle against new authorities in Damascus might be conducted by the same means by which current hirelings fight against Assad and the combat actions would be delocalized and would be spread over the entire region. It is not excluded that in cosequence of bilateral actions situation (if, e.g. Iran closes Strait of Hormuz through which 30-40% of wold oil is transported) will be formed when US/Israel – Iran war becomes inevitable. Such a scenario may carry disasterous consequences for the region (and not only region) becuase theoretically it can not be excluded that nuclear strikes will be delivered during the war and they can be carried out not only by Israel; it is quite possible that Iran has already created limited amount of nuclear weapons within the framework of its nuclear programme.

Anyway such a senario is very serious challenge for Armenia and not only in the context of the aftermaths of the nuclear war11. Current war, in case of some unfavourable developments for Syria and Iran, may distort the balance of regional powers and bring to the Turkish hegemony in the region. Undoubtedly strengthening of Turkey which takes adamant stance on NKR issue and blokades Armenian borders will make its attitude towards Armenia even tougher. It is remarkable that even today some Turkish figures come forward with a proposal to create Islamic NATO and Islamic peacekeeping forces, thus resuscietating the programmes of former prime-minister Erbakan – ideological father of Erdogan12. The nuclear programmes of this country13, which will be a serious challenge first of all for Israel, Greece and Armenia. deserve special scrutiny.

It is obvious that such a scenario is “unattractive” not only for the regional countries but also for today’s main global actor – United States. The created situation forces seeking for the “peaceful” options and scenarios. In this context the article by Kenneth Walz14 published in authoritative Foreign Affairs magazine should be taken into consideration; its main idea is that if Iran possesses nuclear weapons necessary for deterrence, it would promote stability in the region. Similar ideas are expressed in the article by the president of the Council on Foreign Relations Richard Haass published by the same Foreign Affairs magazine15. Let us mention that previously the possibility of “peaceful” scenarios on Iran were offered in the froecests of the head of “STRATFOR” analytical center George Freedman16. In the context of all the aforementioned it is not a mere chance that publications in the American press appeared stating that direct talks between the U.S. and Iran were held17. This information was refuted by both parties but this refutation was not that convincing, which allowed assuming (judging by the information from other sources either) that nevertheless there has been some attempts to find some common grounds and meet habitat.

Of course, the negotiations are not a guarantee of success yet; over the same period the U.S. and Israel initiated joint anti-aricraft and missisle defence drills and military circles in Iran made rather harsh and uncompromising statements, which, nevertheless, can be considered as consolidation of their positions at the negotiations (in case if the latter exist). Let us also mention that the improvement of the the relations between Iran and U.S./Israel is not a suffice condition for peaceful resolution of the Syrian war. Under the current conditions Turkye, Saudi Arabia and Quatar do not always tend to obey perusations of the United States to stop combat actions (which in this particular case does not contradict the U.S. interests).

1 Գագիկ Հարությունյան, Նոր Մերձավոր Արևելք, իրողություններ և հեռանկարներ, Գլոբուս, #3(24), էջ 3, 2012։

2 In the analytical community an opinion is spread that if the Iranian issue resolved, the issue of disintegration of Turkey and Saudi Arabia may actualize. The future of Turkey where the Kurdish issue became topical and the so-called “identity crisis” is deepening in the society, is discussed rather actively. In addition the political relations between supporters of current Islamic and former secular models of development of the country strained. Some analysts also mention that current aggressive foreign policy of Turkey based on Erdogan’s ideology of neo-Ottomanism, also contains some risks. (see, օրինակ, Геворг Миразян, Имам не сдержал азарта, Эксперт, #30-31 (813), с. 69, 2012, Ольга Власова, Геворг Миразян, Большая ошибка Турции, Эксперт, #42 (824), с. 18, 2012.

3 An attempt is made to aggravate the relations between China and Vietnam because of Yongxing island (See, for example, http://topwar.ru/16899-kitay-obyavil-spornyy-ostrov-svoim-gorodom.html). It is remarkable that in Vietnam the nationalist moods over this issue strained by means of virtual social networks.

4 Красько В., Год весны, М., Постум, 2011.

5 О дестабилизации обстановки в Сирии, Зарубежное Военное Обозрение, #8, с. 99, 2012.

6 Сирия: хроника событий, Зарубежное Военное Обозрение, #9, с. 103, 2012.

7 See, for example, The killing fields, The Economist, v.405, #8807, p. 15, 2012, Сергей Балмасов, Подготовка интервенции в Сирию, http://rusrand.ru/pubpoll/pubpoll_506.html.

8Сирийские курды объединились для борьбы с повстанцами, http://lenta.ru/news/2012/11/23/join/

9 See, for example, В сирийском конфликте побеждает Башар Асад – европейский дипломат, http://www.regnum.ru/news/1583305html.

10 See, for example Глава МИД Турции: "Йеменский сценарий" для Сирии более невозможен. http://www.rbc.ru/rbcfreenews/20121021050011.shtml.

11 For the review of such a scenario see: Гагик Арутюнян, Распад системы и формирование будущего, с. 178, Ереван, 2011.

12 В Турции звучат призывы создать «Исламское НАТО» и «Исламские миротворческие силы», http://www.regnum.ru/news/1551857.html.

13 Гагик Арутюнян, Распад системы и формирование будущего, с. 247, Ереван, 2011,

Գագիկ Հարությունյան, Թուրքական միջուկային սպառնալիքը, http://noravank.am/arm/articles/detail.php?ELEMENT_ID=6449, Արա Մարջանյան, Միջուկային Թուրքիա, http://noravank.am/arm/articles/detail.php?ELEMENT_ID=6470.

14 Кеннет Уолтц, Почему Иран должен получить бомбу (ядерный баланс означал бы стабильность), Россия в глобальной политике, т. 10, #4, с. 138, 2012, Foreign Affairs, # 4, 2012.

15Richard N. Haass, Time to Test Iran, http://www.cfr.org/iran/time-test-iran/p29300?cid=nlc-public-the_world_this_week-link16-20121019#.

16 Джордж Фридман, Следующие 100 лет, ИД «Коммерсант», «ЭКСМО» 2010, Джордж Фридман, Следующие 10 лет , ИД «Коммерсант», «ЭКСМО» 2011.

17 http://www.gazeta.ru/politics/news/2012/10/21/n_2580417.shtml

“Globus” analytical journal, #11, 2012

Return
Another materials of author