When Will Peace Come?

By Bai Shi

The UN failed to pass two resolutions on the Syrian crisis on October 8. A draft initiated by France and Spain， demanding an instant stop to all aerial attacks on Aleppo， was vetoed by Russia， a permanent member of the UN Security Council. An alternative， Russian-led draft that did not contain any such demand was also rejected， since it did not obtain the minimum nine votes required by the council.

Syrias northern city of Aleppo has become a key battleground in the civil war that has engulfed the country over the last five years. Once the economic center of Syria， Aleppo has been controlled separately by government forces， “moderate” rebels and radical groups since military conflict broke out. At present， the western part of the city is under state control， while opposition forces occupy the eastern area.

The international communitys latest inability to reach a solution makes the prospect of Syrian peace in the near future even less likely. An agreement for a weeklong ceasefire in Aleppo， reached in Geneva， Switzerland， between U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov on September 10 brought very brief respite to the war-torn city from September 12-19， before a new round of furious fighting broke out.

A feeble truce

Not long after the end of the ceasefire， the Syrian Government declared the beginning of a new offensive targeting eastern Aleppo. Intensive airstrikes over the city resulted in scores of reported civilian injuries and fatalities， which prompted the UN Security Council to hold an emergency meeting at UN headquarters in New York on September 25.

At a Beijing press conference a day later， Chinas Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Geng Shuang addressed the nations concern over the Syrian situation. “Efforts shall be made along four parallel tracks， namely the realization of ceasefire， political negotiation， humanitarian assistance and a joint campaign against terrorism，” he said.

However， in terms of tangible results， little has been gained from the emergency meeting. Staffan de Mistura， the UN special envoy for Syria， implored for more to be done when he addressed the UN in Geneva on October 6， forecasting Aleppos impending destruction if an agreement wasnt put in place soon.

He stated， “The bottom line is， in a maximum of two and a half months， the city of eastern Aleppo at this rate may be totally destroyed， and thousands of Syrian civilians， not terrorists， will be killed， many wounded， and thousands will be refugees seeking to escape.” He referred to the lives of the 275，000 citizens in the besieged area—many of whom are women and children—that would be jeopardized.

During the truce， Aleppo remained rela-tively calm in spite of some outbreaks of fighting. However， the peace was interrupted by the U.S.-led coalition bombing the Syrian Government-held areas on September 17. Later， the U.S. Government admitted the airstrike should have been aimed at terrorist groups but was mistakenly targeted at Syrian Government positions.

The current stalemate in Syria underlines the futility of both the United States and Russia trying to reach their respective strategic purposes in the short term， Gu Ning， an assistant researcher with the Department for Developing Country Studies under the China Institute of International Studies， told the Asia Pacific Daily.

Although the truce is over， “There is still room for the United States and Russia to reach a compromise on the Syrian conflict，”he said.

From Washingtons perspective， the opposition is not strong enough to topple Syrian President Bashar Assads regime. For Russia， it cant always commit to supporting Assads army while continuing to bear the brunt of economic recession and sanctions imposed by the West. Furthermore， both the United States and Russia recognize the socalled Islamic State group as the principal terrorist threat， Gu said.

Washington and Moscow had jointly announced a ceasefire agreement as early as February. However， it was not faithfully implemented and was eventually sabotaged.“The latest ceasefire was merely a copy of the previous one，” Gu noted. “Apparently it is hard to break the continuous cycle of fighting and ceasefires in Syria due to wide divisions between the Syrian Government and the opposition parties.”

Strategic calculations

Mistrust is one of the major factors underpinning such fragile and ineffective ceasefires， according to Wang Jin， an international relations scholar at the University of Haifa， Israel， and an observer of Middle East affairs. Writing in his column on Guancha.cn， an online Chinese news site， Wang asserted mistrust exists between the United States and Russia as well as between the Syrian state army and the opposition.

Apart from the Syrian army， relations between the opposition and jihadist groups are extremely convoluted. Many opposition groups have established contact with the Islamic State group and the Nusra Front. In particular， the U.S.-backed “moderate”opposition maintains close relations with the Nusra Front， which once declared allegiance to the Islamic State group. Under such circumstances， to completely stop the fighting between all factions during any truce is almost impossible， Wang said.

Moreover， the ceasefire talks were mostly dominated by the United States and Russia. Other countries concerned about the Syrian conflict and regional powers including Iran， Turkey and Saudi Arabia were excluded from the talks. Even the Syrian Government and the opposition were not very clear on the details of the negotiations， making the United States and Russia unable to control the situation in Syria on their own.

In fact， to a large extent， the Syrian Government relies on Iranian assistance in the fight on the ground against the opposition and terrorist groups. The Assad regime， sensing a favorable opportunity to make a decisive move in Aleppo， is unlikely to hold back. Considering huge swathes of Syrian territory are still under the control of various opposition forces， Assad needs to retake the city to prolong the longevity of his government.

There are different backgrounds， interests and political purposes among the opposition groups. For example， the Kurdish militants have identified Turkey as their major threat， and have maintained relative peace with the Syrian army. Since September， Turkish-backed militant groups have occupied a number of towns along the Syria-Turkey border， adding further uncertainty to the Syrian civil war. Therefore， truce talks should not be limited to Syrias state army and the “moderate” opposition， Wang stressed.

The ceasefire reflects the strategic calculations of the United States and Russia， Liu Baolai， former Vice President of the Chinese Peoples Institute of Foreign Affairs and former Chinese Ambassador to the United Arab Emirates and Jordan， told Xinhua News Agency.

In spite of recent volatilities， there is still room for negotiations. Owing to Western sanctions and domestic economic hardship， Russia cannot sustain the huge military expenditure required for protracted engagement. Russias primary goal is to protect its strategic interests in Syria and the Middle East， and Moscow understands the unlikelihood of Assad achieving complete victory in the war， despite Russian assistance. By maintaining discussions with Washington， Moscow could strike a deal to ease the pressure mounted by the West and put an end to its isolation in the international community， Liu suggested.

U.S. President Barack Obama has few options in Syria since his presidential term will end in January. The president has admitted that the U.S. strategy “did not work” and that he was “skeptical” about the plan from the beginning.

The war in Syria has lasted over five years， yet the most recent ceasefire was sustained for only seven days. The subsequent failure to pass a resolution through the UN has only worsened the desperate situation.