ISIS on the offensive in Iraq

[Gilrandir]

Seems like Russia is taking a far more active role in the fight against Islamic terrorism, wouldn't that be a good thing?

Russia uses this involvement as a smokescreen to divert the world's attention from Donbas/Crimea and as a bargaining chip to exchange its "crackdown on terrorism" for the Crimea and solution of the Donbas crisis. Plus turmoils in the Arab world are likely to keep oil prices higher which is also good for Russia.

[rvg]

Never thought I'd be cheering on the current Russian regime, but yeah, go Russkies! I have no love for Bashar, but this sonuvabitch just won the lottery by becoming a useful pawn for Putin.

Now for the situation at hand, most likely first victims:

1. Al Nusra. A bunch of islamist scumbags, much smaller than ISIS, thus much easier to bomb into smithereens, have Assad's tanks roll all over them, producing tons of PR for Putin. If Putin is serious about making Syria a publicity showcase, these guys are screwed.

2. FSA. The "moderate" opposition. Moderate, my ass. I don't trust them one bit. Likely to get their clocks cleaned right after Al Nusra. Good riddance. Potentially problematic if some Einstein from the DoD decides that giving these guys AA capability would be a good idea. While we're on the topic of FSA, it's time to stop the CIA gravy train. These guys are finished.

3. ISIS. I think Russians will do a showcase coordinated bombing run against these guys every once in a while, just to show that Russia is helping the overall fight against them. Mostly they'll stay away for two reasons:
1. An anti-ISIS campaign would be long and expensive.
2. We're already there, and it's best to stay out of each other's way.

4. The Kurds. The only ones in this entire conflict who at least partially resemble the good guys. I doubt Russia will touch them at all.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I'm gonna put money on the Kurds getting crushed HARD because ethnically based dissident movements, especially secular and democratic ones, are more dangerous to Putin than IS.

[rvg]

I'm gonna put money on the Kurds getting crushed HARD because ethnically based dissident movements, especially secular and democratic ones, are more dangerous to Putin than IS.

I disagree. Kurds, while very willing to secede from Syria, have absolutely no interest in dethroning Assad. They mind their own business and stay in Kurdish areas. Since they are no threat to Assad's regime, Russia is unlikely to touch them.

[Husar]

Isn't Erdogan already bombing the kurds?

[Tuuvi]

Erdogan has been bombing the PKK, which is classified as a terrorist group and has been fighting a guerrilla war against Turkey. The Syrian Kurds have been mostly left alone.

[Brenus]

Somehow I agree with Gilrandir, but I don't think it is just a smokescreen.

In taking part actively in Syria, Putin obliged other countries to determine their policies in conjunction with his. He regained (or gained) the centre point in negotiation and obliged USA to reconsider their stance.
He gave the signal to USA that they are not any more free to bomb, he can do it as well.
Considering there is a meeting today about Ukraine, he will have some political advantage in showing how he has the capacity to intervene.
He showed to CIA that he can hit their "protégés", even better he showed CIA's "protégés" they are not any more out of target.

Now, former USSR was supporting Kurdish fighters in the 50-60's. I don't know if this will or have an impact on Putin's political/geo-strategical decisions.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I disagree. Kurds, while very willing to secede from Syria, have absolutely no interest in dethroning Assad. They mind their own business and stay in Kurdish areas. Since they are no threat to Assad's regime, Russia is unlikely to touch them.

The Kurds set a bad precedent for similar Muslim groups in Russia.

Erdogan has been bombing the PKK, which is classified as a terrorist group and has been fighting a guerrilla war against Turkey. The Syrian Kurds have been mostly left alone.

Well, the PKK are not all that easy to separate from the Syrian Kurds they are operating with - Turkey is carrying out bombings in Syria against the PKK, which means they're bombing the Syrian Kurd too. Turkey has the same problem as Russia, the Kurds set a bad precedent.

[Gilrandir]

Never thought I'd be cheering on the current Russian regime, but yeah, go Russkies! I have no love for Bashar, but this sonuvabitch just won the lottery by becoming a useful pawn for Putin.

The problem (if it is a problem) is that Russia will not gain anything serious (except its umpteen planes shot down) unless they start a land operation. Bombing was what the West has been doing on and off for a couple of years and it didn't really change the balance between the beligerents. If Putin means business he ought to send his little beige (I think they will use this camouflage color) men. But if he does he will be bogged there for eternity (as he is in Donbas). So he has to choose - to send men and propel Asad into the offensive (but risk reputational damage at home and have no chance for reversal of his actions) or continue bombing and remain just one more nuisance for the bombed and one more target for their stingers.

[rvg]

The problem (if it is a problem) is that Russia will not gain anything serious (except its umpteen planes shot down) unless they start a land operation. Bombing was what the West has been doing on and off for a couple of years and it didn't really change the balance between the beligerents.

Overall, yes. However, we really haven't been bombing Al Nusra much, and Assad hasn't been conducting ground ops vs ISIS much. Thus, Al Nusra has been fighting on the ground without getting bombed while ISIS has been getting bombed without meeting any meaningful opposition on the ground. Well, except the Kurds. They tried to go against the Kurds and got their asses handed back to them.
Anyway, now Al Nusra will be getting it both from the air and the ground forces. I'm anxious to see what happens to them.

If Putin means business he ought to send his little beige (I think they will use this camouflage color) men. But if he does he will be bogged there for eternity (as he is in Donbas).

If Putin get bogged down, that's Putin's problem. The more problems Putin has, the better.

So he has to choose - to send men and propel Asad into the offensive (but risk reputational damage at home and have no chance for reversal of his actions) or continue bombing and remain just one more nuisance for the bombed and one more target for their stingers.

The guy is doubling down on his delusions of grandeur. If this serves to further isolate him, that's fine by me. If he is digging his own political grave, there's no reason to try to take away his shovel. Let him dig.

[Gilrandir]

The guy is doubling down on his delusions of grandeur. If this serves to further isolate him, that's fine by me. If he is digging his own political grave, there's no reason to try to take away his shovel. Let him dig.

It depends. If the West thinks the same, then he will go down. But Obama and Merkel can take Putin's Syrian wild goose chase at its face value (as a crackdown on ISIS) and see in him an ally they need to do the dirty job for them. In this case Putin will start his bargaining and who knows what he may get.

[Brenus]

Once again, don't underestimated Putin. He is not bog down in Ukraine, he's got what he wanted, a neutralised Ukraine. Not any more one country, with NATO try to be out but in as well, troops but without intention to use them in it, Western Countries unable to have a real clear policy.

With Iran and the nuclear deal and now Syria, he is back as major player. No one can ignore him, and he will play n this. Even US are now obliged to change plan.
If you believe he has the same goals than US and EU, you are badly mistaken.

I read so many times in our debates he was finished, and each times it was so wrong.
Russian base in Syria is bigger and stronger.
USA and EU can't do what ever they want (as in Iraq and Libya).
He is able to impose himself on the map.
Not bad for a start.
Will he be bogged down? At this stage, I can't see how, as he plays for the moment as US, UK and France.
If he decides to go on the ground, that might change, but few recent Russian wars showed that their militaries don't hesitate too much on lateral damages, as the school siege by rebels Chechen or in the theatre in Moscow.

[Gilrandir]

Once again, don't underestimated Putin. He is not bog down in Ukraine, he's got what he wanted, a neutralised Ukraine.

I thought we have had this out.

He had wanted much more than what he got. His initial design to split Ukraine "along culture lines" has failed. His Ukrainian adventure got him under sanctions. He was kicked out of G8 and won many new enemies. NATO increased its presence just over his fence. His burden of financing Donbas and Crimea under such conditions is growing harder to endure but he can't just withdraw from either since it would be impossible to explain to his admirers why he left "suffering under the fascitst heel of Kyiv junta populace of Russian speaking brethren" in lurch. Russia's economy is declining steadily if not dramatically because of all this and of oil price drop. His only option is to push the game further and raise stakes by starting another war.

If he decides to go on the ground, that might change, but few recent Russian wars showed that their militaries don't hesitate too much on lateral damages, as the school siege by rebels Chechen or in the theatre in Moscow.

Militaries don't. But the civilians will start asking questions if zink boxes start pouring from Syria. There are no splinters of "the Russian world" there for Russian public opinion to feel the pride at defending them at whatever cost.

[Ice]

Russia uses this involvement as a smokescreen to divert the world's attention from Donbas/Crimea and as a bargaining chip to exchange its "crackdown on terrorism" for the Crimea and solution of the Donbas crisis. Plus turmoils in the Arab world are likely to keep oil prices higher which is also good for Russia.

Not to mention it's a highly convenient tool to distract the Russian populace about the deteriorating Russian economy. Now that Russia illegally annexed Crimea, Syria is only area outside of Russia that Russia still maintains a naval base. I'm fairly sure they do not want to lose it which is understandable.