How the downing of a Russian warplane will change the Syrian conflict
It was almost inevitable that, in a geographically small, complex and multi-layered conflict, that once the aircraft from different nations starting flying combat missions in close proximity there would be problems.
The question now is, with two Turkish F-16 aircraft having shot down a Russian Sukhoi SU-24 in the Turkey-Syria border region, where will this situation lead?
Since Russia intervened in the Syrian civil war from the beginning of October, siding with the regime of Bashar al-Assad, there has been concern that it would cross paths with US aircraft also operating in Syria.
The US and its allies, including Australia, have been running an air campaign against Islamic State sites in Syria for more than a year under the umbrella of “collective self-defence”. This is justified by attacking the enemy of an ally, in this case Iraq, in the territory from which the enemy, Islamic State, is launching attacks – in this case from Syria.
Russia, on the other hand, was explicitly invited by the Syrian regime to assist it in its civil war against opposition Islamist and non-Islamist fighters.
Russia initially tried to assuage international concern over its intervention by saying that it would attack Islamic State targets, which raised the prospect of Russian and US and allied aircraft coming into contact. However Russia has focused largely on attacks against non-IS fighters, including anti-Assad Turkmen groups operating close to the Turkish border.
Turkey has warned Russia against its attacks against the Turkmen groups, whom it regards as ethnic brethren cut off by still disputed border. Russian aircraft were attacking these Turkmen rebels when Turkey alleges two Russian aircraft were encroaching on Turkish airspace. Turkey claims it issued 10 warnings in five minutes before shooting down the Russian aircraft.
Russia denies its plane crossed into Turkish airspace. However, the area which the plane was attacking is adjacent to a section of the Turkish border that juts into Syria. A Russian military diagram shows the Russian plane avoiding that area, by undertaking a sharp turn, but a Turkish diagram shows it entering by running a more plausible straight line.
Numerous problems arise from this incident. The first is that while both pilots ejected, at least one was killed by Turkmen ground fire while parachuting down. A member of a Russian helicopter crew sent to the area was also killed by Turkmen ground fire. It is believed one of the pilots could still be alive and being held prisoner by the Turkmen rebels. If true, this would require delicate negotiations over his release.
The second problem is that Russian president Vladimir Putin will need to be seen in Russia to want to exact some sort of satisfaction for this incident. Putin has built enormous popularity at home through his policy of Russia’s “return to greatness”. Accepting such a loss would be to lose face and to contradict his more assertive policy posture. Acting on it, however, may lead to larger complications, so the question will concern the proportionality of Russia’s response.
The third problem is that Turkey is a NATO partner and any retribution against Turkey would necessarily call into action its NATO allies. Both Russia and NATO want to avoid this outcome, as there is a long history of distant wars creating greater conflicts at home. No one wishes to see this happen.
Russia has clearly indicated that it intends to maintain and increase its strategic presence in Syria, above and beyond support for the Assad regime. This is to counter its long-term concern of having Turkey, as a NATO ally, on its southern flank, and to secure a base for its Mediterranean fleet.
Just weeks ago, Russia, the US and several other countries began talks about dealing with the interdependent conflicts in Syria and Iraq. Those talks have not progressed far. However, this incident casts into sharp relief the need for closely coordinated cooperation in the region, making a return to those talks more critical.
Russia, the US, the UK and France are four of the Permanent Five (P5) member of the UN Security Council (UNSC), which ordinarily has responsibility for dealing with issues such as Syria and Iraq. The other P5 member is China. The UNSC has often failed to find resolutions in the past because of veto provision by any of the five. However, there is now scope for agreement among the four, with China unlikely to veto such an agreement.
The shooting down of the Russian plane could, then, take the current situation in one of three directions. The most worrisome but least likely is that it will lead to retaliation and a subsequent escalation of conflict between Russia, Turkey and Turkey’s NATO allies. The second, most hopeful, is that it will be the catalyst for a mutli-party, UNSC-approved cooperation on ending the war in Syria and Iraq.
The third, quite possible, outcome is that the first option will be too costly, the second too difficult and, as a result, the current situation continues. That it will not provide a resolution to the Syrian and Iraq wars and will continue to raise the prospect of further confrontations between involved countries.