Clinking glasses - frosty faces

Mutual distrust, lack of personal chemistry and contradicting goals may not be the finest substance for a productive relationship, but for President Obama and President Putin, it seems they'll have to do. This is not the first time they confront each other. On the first day of the 70th session of the UNGA, both U.S. President Barack Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin gave their speeches, First President Obama, and then followed an hour later by President Putin; for sure these two speeches dominated the opening of the annual UNGA gathering of the world leaders.  

Few interesting nuances are lost between speeches, as when President Obama said, “Nowhere is our commitment to international order more tested than in Syria.” And after a few lines he said “The United States is prepared to work with any nation, including Russia and Iran, to resolve the conflict”. President Obama also added that he commands the most powerful military force on the planet. But no matter how powerful, its military or strong its economy is, the United States could not solve the world’s problems on its own. Can it be taken as implicit that the policy of the West didn’t work out well in Syria too, so far, and President Obama signaled that they are ready to change the course of their strategy. He also added a powerful defense of diplomacy, but also censured Russia mentioning by name several times for its support to the Assad’s government, Crimean intervention and supporting Ukrainian rebels. “Dangerous currents risk pulling us back into a darker, more disordered world” President Obama added. He put forth a theory for the source of the ongoing conflicts in Syria, to quote from his speech “Assad reacted to a peaceful protest by escalating repression and killing and in turn created the environment for the current strife.” Such violence makes it impossible for the vast majority of Syria’s population to accept President Assad as their legitimate leader, President Obama added. So this gives a clear picture of how US sees the Syrian conflict.

On the Contrary, President Putin’s speech, it was both rhetoric and diplomatic, he put a different view on the ongoing West Asian conflict (particularly Syria). As he advocated the source of the crisis prevailing there, was the emergence of the Islamic State. What caused Islamic State, Mr. Putin reasoned, was the illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003. Well to quote his words, “It is now obvious that the power vacuum created in some countries of the Middle East and North Africa led to the creation of anarchic areas which immediately started to be filled with extremists and terrorists.”  Here it appears that President Putin has taken a step to outmaneuver President Obama on Syria by calling for “a genuine broad international coalition” to contain the Islamic State, including a UNSC resolution to “coordinate” military action ASAP. By President Putin’s arguments, it is clear the real enemy of peace is Islamic state and not Syrian government.  President Putin said that Assad is a vital bulwark against the Islamic State, contradicting his view; President Obama has said that Assad must leave before the conflict in Syria can be resolved.

How President Obama and his allies are going to answer Russia’s theory is murky as of now. But few other speeches at the UNGA gathering adds additional interest, one such is  President François Hollande of France, while speaking to media, cheered the indication of a “broad coalition” called by President Putin and even a UNSC resolution as long as two conditions were met: A stop to the bombings and a “political transition with departure of Assad.” Surprisingly President Hollande did not elaborate much in detail on exactly when Mr. Bashar al-Assad would have to leave the chair. I mean whether now or after the all-out war on IS, stays a mystery. 

Next speech was of President Hassan Rouhani’s, in his speech, he made an offer to help to “bring about democracy” in the two ongoing conflicts where it has interests, in Syria and Iran, even as he signaled his support for the Russian notion of a UNSC resolution. He also added “We propose that the fight against terrorism be incorporated into a binding international document and no country be allowed to use terrorism for the purpose of intervention in the affairs of other countries”

Another person’s statement needs a space here, well even though not a recent one, but of much relevance, Fyodor Lukyanov, editor of Russia in Global Affairs said, “Russia doesn’t have many opportunities in the region, and Syria is a unique case.” Russia is simply stepping into the void left behind by American waffling and a lack of clarity in its Syria policy. “The growth of Russian influence is directly proportional to the decline of American influence in the region,” Fyodor Lukyanov added. “The United States lost its mission so maybe the other regional powers see Russia as bad and unpleasant, but they also see that it acts clearly and consistently.” And yet, Fyodor Lukyanov said, Russia’s expanded horizon for action in the region “is all thanks to Syria. It all starts and ends in Syria.”

It is also quite explicit that there lay a difference between the USA and Russia on the Assad question. Both sides want to defeat Islamic State. But President Putin sees it as a fight to shield the rule of Bashar al-Assad, while President Obama sees Assad as a brutal dictator who needs to step down at once. May be for President Obama, the enemy of its enemy is still its enemy. Notwithstanding President Obama has a defense for his stand as he reasons, although Islamic State is accountable for heinous acts of violence, so is Assad, whose brutality has made him Islamic State's best recruiter. Forced to abandon chemical weapons by the efforts of UN and anti-chemical weapon nations, sources say that President Assad now uses barrels filled with explosives and shrapnel or oil, dropped from helicopters. Not once in his UN speech did President Putin mention of these barrel bombs. So by the arguments of President Obama again, it is clear that Both President Assad’s government and Islamic state threaten peace in Syria.

It is well known that the USA and Russia take a hard course to build a consensus, and this is now still hardened by the US sanctions on Russia over Ukraine crisis. And to matter this in his speech, President Obama said, a fidelity to international rules required that the United States respond forcefully to Russia’s intervention in Crimea and Ukraine. He said that the United States had few economic interests in the region and understood the long history that Russia had with Crimea and Ukraine. “But we cannot stand by when the sovereignty and territorial integrity of a nation is flagrantly violated.” He added: “That’s the basis of the sanctions that the United States and our partners imposed on Russia. It’s not a desire to return to the Cold War.” This can be taken as a signal that US is hearty and ready to take Russia on board in the war Islamic state. But to Russia it seems quite irrelevant. 

President Obama in his speech also admitted a failure by pointing to the war in Iraq where, despite sending more than 100,000 troops and spending trillions of dollars, the United States was unsuccessful in stabilizing the country.  Next after this, he extolled the tactful strategy in which P5+1 had fruitfully negotiated a nuclear agreement with Iran. And, in one of the first lines to yield cheers, he said that the United States had finally acknowledged that its posture toward Cuba had been wrong and that under his watch, diplomatic relations had been restored.

And quite interesting in the whole gathering is that the speech of UN Secretary General’s, keeping all the encounters in mind, He made a subtle statement with a somber tone, asserting that, “Inequality is growing, trust is fading, and impatience with leadership can be seen and felt far and wide.” And it is worth noting that Ban Ki Moon is in his last year of tenure.  He pressed the permanent members of the UNSC to put aside their splits, called explicitly for an “end to bombings” in Yemen.

During the Arab Spring, Russia lost influence in the Middle East, while we saw US gaining the stature it lost after the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Now US can’t find its relevance in Syria as it is losing its hold and which is also official from President Obama’s speech, while Russia is acting boldly, abandoning by the agony of indecision gripping the US. Now US need Russia, not the other way around. Secretary of State John Kerry has pronounced the need to unite with Russia in Syria; and Defense Secretary Ashton Carter and Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu talked “deconfliction” in the Syrian conflict. Even President Obama’s action seems an added advantage to Russia, who has long refused to meet with President Putin because of Russian intervention in Ukraine, has consented to meeting the Russian president to discuss on Syria. So America needs Russia, which means Russia has gotten away with its Ukraine heist and President Putin loves it.

There are few clues to break this impasse, Firstly, nations having influence in the Syria should not agree to President Putin’s demand on the first place for an alliance with Assad’s government to fight Islamic state unless President Putin gets Assad to stop his attacks on his own people and make Assad give assurance of being trustworthy in the fight. Secondly, Assad's ultimate fate needn't be decided as of now, and the world powers shouldn't agree to any plan that keeps him in power after the fighting has stopped. Thirdly,  after all the conflicting approaches in the Syrian issue, all must agree that people are dying out there, no matter who joins who to fight Islamic state, what people of Syria need is peace and a legitimate government. Assad question being in the forefront, one solution to it, is that to build a consensus between the global powers mainly USA and Russia. To quote what Ban Ki Moon said, that there are five countries who “hold the key” to peace in Syria (Russia, the United States, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Turkey). And after the war gets overlays a Herculean task in forming a Government in Syria, which works for people’s interest, for which, more generosity is needed, more democracy is essential, more imagination is needed, which will need generations of energy to rebuild out of the chaos created by a dangerous and misguided war.  The bottom line is that, for once, Russian foreign policy and American foreign policy seem to complement each other. 

References: 

Obama's Speech (Full Text): www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/09/28/remarks-president-obama-united-nations-general-assembly

Putin's Speech (Full Text): www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/09/28/read-putins-u-n-general-assembly-speech/

Hassan Rouhani's Speech (Full Text): www.timesofisrael.com/full-text-of-rouhanis-2015-address-to-the-un-general-assembly/

Ban Ki Moon's Speech (Full Text): http://www.un.org/apps/news/infocus/sgspeeches/