A flurry of diplomatic activity in advance of the next stage of talks
does not necessarily portend much
A LOT is going on; but whether any of it will really amount to much is hard
to say. John Kerry’s visit to Moscow on December 15th, as he tries to prepare
the ground for a third round of Syrian peace talks in Vienna, scheduled to open
on January 1st, is a case in point. Mr Kerry’s hope is that at this meeting of
the euphemistically named, 17-nation International Syrian Support Group (ISSG),
agreements will be reached on a general ceasefire and a timetable for political
transition. This week, Mr Kerry has been talking optimistically about making
“real progress” in narrowing differences with Russia’s president, Vladimir
Putin, over ways to end the conflict. But there is little sign of it.
A critical disagreement is over which parts of the armed opposition to
Bashar al-Assad are deemed sufficiently respectable to be represented in
Vienna. Last week, Saudi Arabia sponsored a conference of rebel groups in a bid
to form as united a front as possible. Islamic State (IS) and al-Qaeda’s Syrian
affiliate, Jabhat al-Nusra, were not invited to Riyadh, but Ahrar al-Sham and
Jaish al-Islam, two powerful armed factions with Salafist roots, were.
The
Americans have not yet decided whether outfits of their ilk should be
represented. But the Russians are clear that they should not be, and have
called upon Washington to end its policy of “dividing terrorists into good guys
and bad guys”. That may scupper the chances of Russia attending a pre-Vienna
meeting of ministers from ISSG countries in New York that has been pencilled in
for December 18th.
For their part, the Russians seem confused about how to treat the West’s
preferred group, the Free Syrian Army (FSA). On December 14th Russia’s chief of
the general staff, Valery Gerasimov, was reported to have claimed that his
country was supplying the FSA with weapons and giving them other material
support. The Kremlin later denied it—and the FSA, which is fighting Mr Assad’s
Russian- and Iranian-backed forces, said it was still be being bombed by
Russian planes.
Meanwhile, also on December 14th, Barack Obama emerged from a rare briefing
at the Pentagon on the progress of the campaign against IS to complain that
although some of America’s coalition allies were stepping up to the plate,
others were not. “France, Germany and the United Kingdom, Australia and Italy
are doing more: so must others,” said a frustrated president. The rebuke was
aimed squarely at the Sunni Arab members of the coalition, many of whom who
have been diverted from fighting IS into supporting the flailing Saudi-led
intervention in Yemen. Mr Obama is not looking for Arab armies in Syria, but he
thinks Arab states could be doing much more to help forge the more acceptable
Syrian rebel factions into a coherent force.
Perhaps in a bid to stem off such criticism, the Saudis simultaneously
announced the formation of a 34-nation alliance of mainly Islamic countries
from Asia, Africa and the Arab world (but not Iran or Oman) to fight terrorism.
The energetic young Saudi defence minister, Muhammad bin Salman, said that the
new coalition would co-ordinate counter-terrorist efforts in Syria, Iraq,
Sinai, Yemen, Libya, Mali, Nigeria, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Apart from the
aim of establishing a joint operations centre in Riyadh, further details have
yet to emerge. Quite what practical, as opposed to rhetorical, purpose such an
alliance will serve has not been explained. It is, however, unlikely to make
poor Mr Kerry’s Herculean labours any easier.
No comments:
Post a Comment