UA-69458566-1

Friday, December 15, 2017

Syria Situation Report: November 16 - December 14, 2017

By: ISW Syria Team and Syria Direct

This series of graphics marks the latest installment of our Syria SITREP Map made possible through a partnership between the Institute for the Study of War and Syria Direct. These graphics depict significant developments in the Syrian Civil War from November 16 to December 14, 2017. The control of terrain represented on the graphics is accurate as of November 16 or December 12, 2017.

Special credit to Sana Sekkarie of the Institute for the Study of War for the text of these Syria SITREP Maps.



Thursday, November 9, 2017

Syria Situation Report: October 24 - November 9, 2017

By: ISW Syria Team and Syria Direct 

This graphic marks the latest installment of our Syria SITREP Map made possible through a partnership between the Institute for the Study of War and Syria Direct. This graphic depicts significant developments in the Syrian Civil War from October 24 – November 9, 2017. The control of terrain represented on the graphic is accurate as of November 9, 2017. 

Special credit to Sana Sekkarie of the Institute for the Study of War for the text of this Syria SITREP Map.


Friday, August 25, 2017

Syria Situation Report: August 8 - 23, 2017

By: ISW Syria Team and Syria Direct 

This series of graphics marks the latest installments of our Syria SITREP Map made possible through a partnership between the Institute for the Study of War and Syria Direct. These graphics depict significant developments in the Syrian Civil War from August 8 - 23, 2017. The control of terrain represented on the graphics is accurate as of August 8, 2017.

Special credit to Sana Sekkarie of the Institute for the Study of War for her contributions to the text of these Syria SITREP Maps.





Monday, August 14, 2017

Syria Situation Report: July 27 - August 9, 2017

By ISW Syria Team and Syria Direct

This series of graphics marks the latest installments of our Syria SITREP Map made possible through a partnership between the Institute for the Study of War and Syria DirectThese graphics depict significant developments in the Syrian Civil War from July 27 to August 9, 2017. The control of terrain represented on the graphics is accurate as of August 8, 2017.

Special credit to Matti Suomenaro and Sana Sekkarie of the Institute for the Study of War for their contributions to the text and graphics of this series of Syria SITREP Maps.


Monday, July 31, 2017

Syria Situation Report: June 7 - 29, 2017

By ISW Syria Team and Syria Direct

This series of graphics marks the latest installments of our Syria SITREP Map made possible through a partnership between the Institute for the Study of War and Syria Direct. These graphics depict significant developments in the Syrian Civil War from June 7 to June 29, 2017. The control of terrain represented on the graphics is accurate as of June 15 or June 22, 2017.


Special credit to Matti Suomenaro and Sana Sekkarie of the Institute for the Study of War for their contributions to the text and graphics of this series of Syria SITREP Maps.







Friday, June 2, 2017

Syria Situation Report: May 19 - June 1, 2017

By ISW Syria Team and Syria Direct

ISIS launched a wave of spectacular attacks in Western Syria prior to the start of Ramadan on May 26. ISIS detonated one VBIED targeting the majority-Alawite Zahraa District of Homs City on May 23. On the same day, pro-regime forces intercepted two bombers wearing SVESTS near the Shi’a Sayyida Zeinab Shrine in Damascus. ISIS also conducted a double SVEST - IED attack targeting a meeting of Salafi-Jihadist group Ahrar al-Sham in Eastern Idlib Province on May 22. These attacks follow a major ground attack by ISIS against two majority-Ismaili towns in Eastern Hama Province on 18 MAY. The attack wave demonstrates that ISIS retains the capability and intent to intensify its operations against both pro-regime and opposition forces in Western Syria despite its continued withdrawal from large stretches of Southern and Central Syria towards Eastern Syria. 

NATO leaders agreed to formally join the Anti-ISIS Coalition in Iraq and Syria during the NATO Summit in Brussels on May 25. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg stated that the agreement sends a “strong signal” of “commitment to fight global terrorism” but stressed that the bloc will not “engage in combat operations” against ISIS. NATO will instead expand its "airspace management" and aerial refueling mission for coalition aircraft as well as the deployment of special forces teams to train local partner forces. NATO will also establish a "terrorism intelligence cell" to improve information-sharing on foreign fighters. The decision likely aimed to meet the priorities of U.S. President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly questioned the value of the alliance while stressing the need to expand its counter-terrorism capabilities. The measure remains largely symbolic.

This graphic marks the latest installment of our Syria SITREP Map made possible through a partnership between the Institute for the Study of War and Syria Direct. This graphic depicts significant recent developments in the Syrian Civil War. The control of terrain represented on the graphic is accurate as of May 31, 2017.


Sunday, May 21, 2017

Russia Lays a Trap in Syria

By Genevieve Casagrande and Ellen Stockert

Russia seeks to use the establishment of “de-escalation zones” to reset its operations and constrain U.S. policy options in Syria. Russia, Turkey, and Iran signed an agreement to establish four de-escalation zones in western Syria on May 4. The agreement intends to preempt the unilateral establishment of “interim zones of stability” by the U.S. in Syria. The de-escalation zone agreement has provided Russia, Iran, and the Bashar al-Assad regime with a period of rest and refit to refocus their efforts in Eastern Syria, particularly in areas where the U.S. is leading operations with Syrian rebels. Russia pivoted its air campaign to focus on ISIS-held terrain in Eastern Syria from May 1 - 18.  Russia, Iran, and the Assad regime likely intend to use the period of de-escalation to disrupt joint U.S.-rebel operations to push north against ISIS in Homs and Deir ez Zour Provinces, while bolstering pro-regime advances against ISIS in both central Homs and eastern Aleppo. Pro-regime forces seized Jirrah Airbase from ISIS in eastern Aleppo Province on May 13 with Russian air support. Pro-regime forces also advanced towards a joint rebel-U.S. base at Tanaf in eastern Homs Province amidst the period of de-escalation. The U.S. responded to the threat against Tanaf by striking pro-regime and Iranian-backed militia forces near the base on May 18, however. 

Russia has also used the de-escalation agreement to reshape its deployment to Syria. Russia claimed to withdraw 30 aircraft from the Bassel al-Assad International Airport in Latakia Province upon signing the de-escalation agreement on May 4. The alleged withdrawal does not represent the degradation of Russian capabilities in Syria, nor does it preclude Russia from conducting airstrikes. Rather, Russia likely seeks to replace particular air assets with alternate air frames and capabilities better suited for the next phase of pro-regime operations in Syria, similar to previous Russian “withdrawals” throughout 2016. Russia reportedly deployed at least 21 M-30 Howitzers and a new shipment of missiles for the advanced S-400 Surface-to-Air Missile System operated by Russia in Syria in early May. Russia also deployed at least one A-50U ‘Mainstay’ Aerial Early Warning and Control Aircraft to Bassel al-Assad International Airport on the Syrian Coast as of May 3. 


Russia deliberately drove fluctuations in the levels of violence in rebel-held Syria in order to compel local and international actors to submit to the Russian-Iranian-Turkish de-escalation zones. Russia escalated and subsequently tapered its air campaign in Syria prior to the Astana Talks in Kazakhstan from May 3 – 4, after which Russia, Turkey, and Iran signed the ‘de-escalation zone’ agreement. Prior to the agreement, Russia intensified its air campaign against mainstream elements of the Syrian opposition, relief providers, and civilian infrastructure such as hospitals in Idlib and Hama Provinces from April 26 – 30. However, Russia subsequently halted its air campaign on the proposed de-escalation zones on May 1 and shifted its focus toward ISIS-held terrain in eastern Syria from May 1 - 18.  The de-escalation zones provided Russia and its Iranian allies with a period of reset to recover following heavy losses in clashes with opposition forces in northern Hama Province throughout April 2017. Pro-regime forces have meanwhile begun to slowly escalate violence within the de-escalation zones, repeatedly violating the agreement with artillery strikes in Dera’a and Hama Provinces. Russia’s continual use of violence to coerce local and international actors to accept agreements that primarily serve Russia, Iran, and Syrian President Bashar al Assad precludes any possibility of a legitimate, Russian-backed ceasefire agreement in Syria.

The following graphic depicts ISW’s assessment of Russian airstrike locations based on reports from local Syrian activist networks, statements by Russian and Western officials, and documentation of Russian airstrikes through social media. This map represents locations targeted by Russia’s air campaign, rather than the number of individual strikes or sorties. The graphic likely under-represents the extent of the locations targeted in Eastern Syria, owing to a relative lack of activist reporting from that region.

High-Confidence Reporting. ISW places high confidence in reports corroborated by documentation from opposition factions and activist networks on the ground in Syria deemed to be credible that demonstrate a number of key indicators of Russian airstrikes.

Low-Confidence Reporting. ISW places low confidence in reports corroborated only by multiple secondary sources, including from local Syrian activist networks deemed credible or Syrian state-run media.


Friday, February 24, 2017

Syria Situation Report: February 16 - 24, 2017

By ISW Syria Team and Syria Direct

Opposition groups backed by Turkey in Operation Euphrates Shield seized full control over Al-Bab in Northern Aleppo Province as well as two neighboring towns, ending more than three months of heavy clashes. The fall of Al-Bab will enable Turkish President Recep Erdogan to pursue his next stated strategic priorities in Northern Syria – including an offensive to expel the Syrian Kurdish YPG from Manbij in Eastern Aleppo Province. Turkish Defense Minister Fikri Isik warned that Turkey will “reevaluate” military operations against the town if the U.S. does not ensure the imminent withdrawal of the Syrian Kurdish YPG from Manbij. Meanwhile, UN Special Envoy to Syria Staffan de Mistura opened the Geneva IV Talks between regime and opposition delegations with the goal of reaching a political solution to the Syrian Civil War. The negotiations nonetheless appear primed to fail amidst deteriorating conditions on the ground - including an increasingly unstable nationwide ceasefire and a continued consolidation of power by Al-Qaeda in Syria. 

These graphics mark the latest installment of our Syria SITREP Map made possible through a partnership between the Institute for the Study of War and Syria Direct. The graphic depicts significant recent developments in the Syrian Civil War. The control of terrain represented on the graphic is accurate as of February 16, 2017.


Thursday, December 22, 2016

Syria Situation Report: December 15 - 22, 2016

By ISW Syria Team and Syria Direct

Turkey, Russia, and Iran released a joint statement - termed the ‘Moscow Declaration’ - noting that all three countries agree to “facilitate and become the guarantors” of any political agreement to end the Syrian Civil War following a trilateral meeting in Moscow, Russia on December 20. The statement also noted that all three countries “reiterate their determination” to fight against ISIS and Syrian Al-Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra as well as separate both factions from other “armed opposition groups” in Syria. The meeting occurred as scheduled despite the assassination of the Russian Ambassador to Turkey in Ankara on December 19. Meanwhile, pro-regime forces announced their full control over Aleppo City on December 22 following the last evacuations from the remaining opposition-held districts of Eastern Aleppo City. The evacuations faced repeated delays due to poor weather conditions as well as last-minute demands by Iran for parallel evacuations from the besieged pro-regime towns of Fu’ah and Kefraya in Idlib Province. The final deal included phased parallel evacuations for the two towns as well as two besieged opposition-held towns near Damascus.

This graphic marks the latest installment of our Syria SITREP Map made possible through a partnership between the Institute for the Study of War and Syria DirectThe graphic depicts significant recent developments in the Syrian Civil War. The control of terrain represented on the graphic is accurate as of December 19, 2016.


Wednesday, December 21, 2016

Russian Airstrikes in Syria: November 21 - December 19, 2016

By Jonathan Mautner

Russia tempered its air operations across Northern Syria following the surrender of the last remaining opposition-held districts of Eastern Aleppo City on December 13, but only after playing a decisive military role in enabling this major battlefield victory for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Russia continued its campaign of airstrikes against the pocket of opposition-held districts southwest of the city center from December 7 – 12, intensifying its bombardment in the two days before Russia and Turkey brokered a surrender and local ceasefire agreement to evacuate remaining opposition fighters and civilians to Western Aleppo Province. Russia resumed its airstrikes in Aleppo City on December 14 after Iran spoiled the initial deal with additional last-minute demands for parallel evacuations from the besieged majority-Shi’a towns of Fu’ah and Kefraya in Idlib Province. Russia nonetheless slowed the tempo of its air operations in Aleppo and Idlib Provinces from December 13 – 19 in a likely attempt to preserve the evacuation deal and gain credibility as an impartial diplomatic broker. The eventual completion of the evacuation, however, will likely signal the start of a new phase in Russia’s air campaign in Northern Syria. Russia will likely resume its aggressive targeting of opposition-held terrain in Idlib Province under the guise of anti-terrorism operations against Jabhat Fatah al-Sham – the successor of Syrian Al-Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra. This narrative may gain further traction as the remaining acceptable opposition forces evacuated from Aleppo City deepen their cooperation with Salafi-jihadist groups in Northern Syria in order to continue their insurgency against the Assad regime.

Russia also intensified its air operations against ISIS in Eastern Syria beginning on December 7 in a failed attempt to prevent the recapture of Palmyra in Eastern Homs Province by ISIS on December 11. Russia conducted heavy waves of airstrikes against ISIS on the outskirts of Palmyra from December 7 – 10 amidst an ongoing offensive by the group against outlying oil and natural gas fields. Although the air campaign forced ISIS to temporarily reverse its progress into Palmyra, poorly-trained pro-regime militiamen on the ground proved unable to hold the city – particularly given the withdrawal of local garrisons by Russia and Iran on or around December 7. In the wake of that defeat, Russia conducted punitive air operations against ISIS-held terrain in Eastern Syria on December 12, including the group’s stronghold in Ar-Raqqa City and a swathe of several villages in Eastern Hama Province allegedly targeted with chemical munitions. Russia will likely invest more heavily in the defense of the nearby T4 (Tiyas) Airbase in order to protect its main base of operations in Central Syria. Russia reportedly deployed special operations forces to T4 Airbase on December 13 amidst ongoing clashes with ISIS, reflecting the airfield’s critical importance as a launching point for helicopter gunships operated by Russia in Palmyra. The recapture of Palmyra highlights the inability of pro-regime forces to establish security across the entire country without sustained support from Russia and Iran, notwithstanding their recent success in Aleppo City. In the end, Russia and Syria prioritized the defeat of the opposition in Aleppo City over the defense of Palmyra from ISIS, ultimately enhancing the threat posed by Salafi-jihadist groups in both Northern and Eastern Syria. 

The following graphic depicts ISW’s assessment of Russian airstrike locations based on reports from local Syrian activist networks, statements by Russian and Western officials, and documentation of Russian airstrikes through social media. This map represents locations targeted by Russia’s air campaign, rather than the number of individual strikes or sorties. 

High-Confidence Reporting. ISW places high confidence in reports corroborated by documentation from opposition factions and activist networks on the ground in Syria deemed to be credible that demonstrate a number of key indicators of Russian airstrikes.

Low-Confidence Reporting. ISW places low confidence in reports corroborated only by multiple secondary sources, including from local Syrian activist networks deemed credible or Syrian state-run media.

Wednesday, September 21, 2016

Russian Airstrikes in Syria: Pre- and Post Cessation of Hostilities

By Genevieve Casagrande

Key Takeaway: The cessation of hostilities agreement in Syria has collapsed and violence has once again ramped up across Syria. The nationwide ceasefire brokered by Russia and the U.S. on September 9 stipulated that after at least seven days of reduced violence and uninterrupted humanitarian access across Syria, the U.S. and Russia would establish a Joint Implementation Center (JIC) to coordinate strikes against ISIS and al Qaeda. The ceasefire, although short-lived, was ultimately a success for the Syrian regime and Russia. Both parties utilized the cessation in order to consolidate recent gains in Aleppo City and to redeploy military assets to other critical frontlines in likely preparation for upcoming offensives. Russian and regime airstrikes escalated against opposition forces in Aleppo and Idlib Provinces in the 48-hours prior to the cessation of hostilities going into effect on September 12. Russia subsequently pivoted its strikes towards ISIS-held terrain in Eastern Syria throughout the tenuous ceasefire with the opposition, but began to break the terms of the ceasefire and intensify strikes against opposition targets in Homs Province on September 16 – 17. Reported Russian airstrikes targeting a UN humanitarian aid convoy on September 19 marked a dangerous phase line in the willingness of Russia and the Syrian regime to violate international law and deny besieged opposition-held areas humanitarian aid. Hardline elements of the Syrian opposition meanwhile continued to use the failed ceasefire to increase their own influence among mainstream opposition factions, undermining efforts by the U.S. to compel independent opposition groups to distance themselves from al Qaeda and ISIS in Syria. Both Russia and the Syrian regime will continue to use subsequent ceasefires to solidify gains against the Syrian opposition in Aleppo City and to employ siege-and-starve tactics to force the defeat of the opposition in critical terrain. Russia will continue to exert pressure on the U.S. and the international community by escalating levels of violence in order to extract concessions in negotiations over the Syrian Civil War.

The preceding graphic depicts ISW’s assessment of Russian airstrike locations based on reports from local Syrian activist networks, statements by Russian and Western officials, and documentation of Russian airstrikes through social media. This map represents locations targeted by Russia’s air campaign, rather than the number of individual strikes or sorties. 


High-Confidence reporting. ISW places high confidence in reports corroborated by documentation from opposition factions and activist networks on the ground in Syria deemed to be credible that demonstrate a number of key indicators of Russian airstrikes.

Low-Confidence reporting. ISW places low confidence in reports corroborated only by multiple secondary sources, including from local Syrian activist networks deemed credible or Syrian state-run media.


Introduction

The General Command of the Syrian Arab Army declared an end to the seven-day ceasefire on September 19 as violence by all parties escalated in Aleppo, Damascus, and Homs Provinces. Russian airstrikes on a UN humanitarian aid convoy only hours after the Syrian regime’s declaration of the end of the cessation represented a dangerous escalatory step in the pro-regime willingness to violate international law and deny aid to besieged opposition-held areas in Syria. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has nonetheless continued to reiterate that the “ceasefire is not dead,” despite its near-constant violations and the Syrian regime’s denial of humanitarian aid to besieged populations throughout the country. Members of the International Syria Support Group (ISSG) similarly agreed on September 20 to “pursue” a ceasefire based upon the terms of the U.S.-Russia deal announced on September 9. Pro-regime airstrikes have meanwhile escalated across the country, resulting in over 38 deaths in Aleppo Province on September 18 - 19 alone.


The U.S.-Russia Ceasefire Deal

The U.S. and Russia announced the resumption of a nationwide ‘cessation of hostilities’ in Syria on September 9. The agreement stipulated that after at least seven consecutive days of “reduced violence” and unimpeded humanitarian aid deliveries beginning on September 12, the U.S. would establish a Joint Implementation Center (JIC) in order to coordinate U.S. and Russian airstrikes against al Qaeda and ISIS in Syria. The deal required Russia to ensure the regime’s adherence to its terms to include the prevention of regime warplanes from conducting air operations in areas where “the legitimate opposition” or “[Jabhat] al Nusra” is present as designated by maps drawn up during technical meetings between Russia and the United States. The full terms of the agreement were not publically disclosed, but the U.S. reportedly shared the text of the deal to designated “partners” after considerable pressure from France and Russia. The deal nonetheless lacked the necessary enforcement mechanisms or consequences to ceasefire violations to prevent pro-regime forces and Salafi-Jihadist groups from spoiling the cessation of hostilities.


Russian and the Regime Violations

Russian and the Syrian regime amplified their air campaigns against the Syrian opposition in the 48-hours prior to the ceasefire deal going into affect on September 12. The Russian air campaign subsequently pivoted to primarily target ISIS in eastern Syria after the onset of the cessation of hostilities. Pro-regime forces meanwhile continued operations against remaining opposition-held pockets in the Eastern Ghouta suburbs of Damascus and the northern Homs countryside; Russian airstrikes notably began to escalate against opposition-held areas in northern Homs from September 16 - 17 in violation of the agreement. Pro-regime forces will likely try to consolidate control over the central corridor to include the collapsed opposition-held pockets near the regime strongholds of Damascus and Homs cities over the coming months.

Pro-regime airstrikes on a UN humanitarian convoy in western Aleppo Province just hours after the regime’s declared end to the ceasefire marked a dramatic escalation in efforts to deny humanitarian aid deliveries in opposition-held terrain. The targeted strike violated both international law and the terms of the ceasefire brokered by the U.S. and Russia. It killed an estimated 20 civilians and at least one aid worker while destroying 18 trucks destined for opposition-held areas of western Aleppo Province. The UN subsequently announced the suspension of all humanitarian aid convoys into Syria. Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes stated on September 20 that the U.S. holds “the Russian government accountable” for the airstrikes against the aid convoy. Rhodes did not specify if the strike was carried out by the Syrian regime or Russia, but unidentified U.S. officials reported that preliminary analysis of the strike indicated two Russian aircraft carried out the attack. Russia likely seeks to use the escalating levels of violence to constrain the U.S. and the international community into increasing the threshold for acceptable levels of violence in Syria in order to allow the Syrian regime to pursue victory over the Syrian opposition in northwestern Syria.

Russia had already exerted its own control over the flow of humanitarian aid into Aleppo at the time of the strike, however. The UN ultimately remained unable to deliver humanitarian aid to the estimated 300,000 civilians in Eastern Aleppo City throughout the cessation, despite the deal’s requirement for unhindered humanitarian aid deliveries to Aleppo. Russian forces deployed a “mobile observation post” at the entrance to Aleppo City along the Castello Road on September 13, which was the primary supply route into opposition-held areas of eastern Aleppo City before pro-regime forces severed it in late July 2016. Pro-regime forces temporarily withdrew from their positions along the road to transfer control of the critical supply route to Russian forces on September 15, but ultimately returned to their positions along Castello after opposition forces refused to withdraw. There was little indication, however, that the Russian forces withdrew from the supply route. The movement of Russian personnel to Castello Road allowed Russia and the regime to block humanitarian aid deliveries to Aleppo City in support of the Assad regime’s siege-and-starve tactics to force the surrender of the opposition in Aleppo under a crippling siege. Russia agreed to the cessation of hostilities deal only after pro-regime forces with considerable Russian air support were able to reestablish the siege on Aleppo City on September 4, essentially freezing frontlines with the opposition in the city. The ceasefire allowed the regime and Russia to reset operations in Aleppo in order to consolidate these recent gains, while the Syrian opposition remains constrained by the ceasefire and unable to launch a counteroffensive.  


Operational Reset

The Syrian regime and Russia used the cessation of hostilities to shift military assets to frontlines with ISIS. Russia allegedly deployed four Mi-28 ‘Havoc’ attack helicopters, a transport helicopter, and a contingent of fifty special operations forces to the Shayrat Airbase near Homs City on September 18, according to local activists. Russia has used prior ceasefire agreements to redeploy additional military assets to key frontlines within Syria, including a deployment of attack helicopters to the Shayrat Airbase in the wake of the original ‘cessation of hostilities’ brokered in February 2016. Pro-regime forces exploited the dynamic rotary wing strikes to retake the city of Palmyra from ISIS in central Homs in March 2016 during the previous nationwide ceasefire. Russia and the Syrian regime likely sought to similarly use this period of cessation to divert resources away from previously active frontlines with the opposition to clear remaining ISIS-held terrain threatening the regime-held city of Palmyra and the remaining regime-held areas of Deir ez Zour City.

Russian airstrikes during the cessation of hostilities primarily concentrated against ISIS-held areas in Deir ez Zour Province amidst a pro-regime offensive in the area. However, these operations were disrupted by reported U.S.-led coalition airstrikes on pro-regime forces in Deir ez Zour on September 17 that accidentally killed at least sixty-two pro-regime fighters. U.S. CENTCOM released a statement confirming that coalition aircraft may have “mistakenly struck” pro-regime forces while conducting operations against ISIS near Deir ez-Zour City, stressing that the coalition would not “intentionally strike” a known regime position. The Russian Ministry of Defense blamed the incident on the “stubborn refusal” of the U.S. to coordinate its air operations with Russia in Syria, exerting additional pressure on the U.S. to partner with Russia amidst escalating hostilities with opposition forces in western Syria.


Syrian Opposition and the Ceasefire

The failed attempt at a ceasefire ultimately risks driving the remaining “legitimate” members of the opposition towards hardline groups and fueling anti-U.S. sentiment. Twenty-one "FSA-affiliated" opposition factions and prominent Salafi-Jihadist group Ahrar al Sham released joint statements on September 12 agreeing to allow humanitarian aid into besieged areas in Syria. The groups also expressed considerable reservations about the lack of enforcement mechanisms to prevent indiscriminate pro-regime aerial bombardment and rejected the “targeting of Jabhat Fatah al-Sham or any other faction that fights against the regime.” The joint statement represented tentative support for a general ceasefire in Syria, but a sharp condemnation of the current terms of the nationwide ‘cessation of hostilities’ brokered by the U.S. and Russia. Hardline elements of the opposition such as Jabhat Fatah Al Sham (JFS) – successor of al Qaeda’s Syrian affiliate Jabhat al Nusra -- have used the failed ceasefire to increase their own influence within opposition ranks in Syria. JFS Emir Abu Mohammad al-Joulani condemned the U.S.- and Russian-brokered nationwide ceasefire on September 17. He stressed that the deal between the two countries aims to impose a “political solution that would result in the complete surrender. Continued failures of the United States to bring about a functioning ceasefire to Syria will ultimately drive the long term staying power of hardline groups like JFS in Syria as anti-U.S. sentiment grows. The U.S. risks driving these “legitimate” groups closer to al Qaeda in Syria, rather than forcing these groups to distance themselves from hardline, Salafi-Jihadist groups.


Conclusion

The U.S. cannot accept a partnership with Russia in Syria so long as it continues to function as a belligerent actor in the conflict. Russia will continue to pursue its vital interests in Syria to include the preservation of the Assad regime and will continue to prioritize the defeat of the Syrian opposition, which remains the Syrian regime’s primary adversary. Russia and the regime will therefore pursue a strategy to remove mainstream opposition forces from the battlefield either through their submission, destruction, or the transformation of these groups into radical elements that can be rightfully targeted as terrorists. Russia is purposefully driving this radicalization through its deliberate targeting of civilian and humanitarian infrastructure. Russia will pursue an escalatory path in Syria that will constrain the U.S. and the international community into accepting certain levels of violence in exchange for a U.S.-Russia deal that will discourage Russia from escalating further. The U.S. must develop appropriate enforcement mechanisms to ensure both pro-regime forces and opposition groups adhere to the terms of any potential ceasefire in Syria and cannot rely upon Russia to ensure compliance with international law, let alone ceasefires.