عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Features

Will ‘Syrian Understandings’ Stop the American-Russian Collapse?

US President Joe Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin arrive to meet at the Villa la Grange on Wednesday in Geneva, Switzerland. (AP)
US President Joe Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin arrive to meet at the Villa la Grange on Wednesday in Geneva, Switzerland. (AP)
TT
20
TT

Will ‘Syrian Understandings’ Stop the American-Russian Collapse?

US President Joe Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin arrive to meet at the Villa la Grange on Wednesday in Geneva, Switzerland. (AP)
US President Joe Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin arrive to meet at the Villa la Grange on Wednesday in Geneva, Switzerland. (AP)

Ever since Russia’s direct military intervention in Syria in late 2015, every summit between President Vladimir Putin and his American counterpart former President Donald Trump was an opportunity to reach understandings that would bring Washington closer to Moscow’s stance on the crisis.

Now, Syria, in wake of Wednesday’s summit between Putin and US President Joe Biden, has become a “buffer zone” to halt the major collapse between Washington and Moscow. The leaders discussed cooperation in limited files – small or strategic – playing out in Syria.

Trump, who “trusted” Putin, agreed during an unannounced meeting on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Hamburg in 2017, to a ceasefire in southern Syria. He also proposed ending the secret program that was run by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), with the participation of Arab and western countries, to support the Free Syrian Army through Jordan to the south. The program helped the FSA combat the Syrian government.

This was a “gift” offered by Trump to Putin before their meeting on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Vietnam in 2017.

The two leaders did not hold a direct announced meeting, rather they sufficed with issuing a statement in which they expressed their “rejection of a military solution in Syria.” They also agreed to keep open channels of military communication between Russia and the US with the aim of averting dangerous accidents between forces fighting ISIS.

Previously, the American and Russian armies had agreed to a deconfliction arrangement in Syria. They also designated a separating line, which is the Euphrates River, whereby US-backed forces would be deployed east of the river and Moscow-backed forces would be deployed to its west.

In July 2018, Putin and Trump met in Helsinki. Among several points, they announced their commitment to “guaranteeing Israel’s security”. Then Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had been pushing the two leaders to take efforts to “keep Iran out of southern Syria.”

In August 2018, it was announced that an international-regional deal on southern Syria was reached. Russia's special envoy to Syria, Alexander Lavrentiev said that Hezbollah fighters and Shiite militias backed by Iran had pulled out of the area. The Iranians, who work as military “advisors” to the government forces, were not included in the deal.

Wednesday’s Putin-Biden summit differs from previous meetings between the Russian and American leaders. The goal behind the cooperation in Syria has changed. It is no longer about building trust or offering American “gifts” to Russia. But Syria is now being used as an arena to stop the collapse in American-Russian relations, which are at their lowest point since the Cold War. Ties have deteriorated because of sanctions, cyberattacks, diplomatic tensions, meddling in interna affairs and differences over North Korea, Ukraine and others.

It is widely believed that despite the “red lines” that Putin and Biden sought to draw over contentious issues, they sought cooperation over others, such as the Iran nuclear file, Syria and the fight against terrorism.

On Syria, the Biden administration is prioritizing the continued defeat of ISIS, halting the regime’s chemical weapons program, ensuring Damascus’ commitment to the 2013 Russian-American agreement and delivering cross-border humanitarian aid to Syrians.

Ahead of Wednesday’s summit, the Americans and Russians on the highest levels sought to exchange various political and field messages in all files. This included Russia’s strikes on Idlib that targeted leading members of the terrorist Hayat Tahrir al-Sham group and the Americans’ push to increase the number of border crossings to deliver aid.

It all likelihood, the Geneva summit will give the green light for keeping open the channel of dialogue between Russia and the US in Vienna. Washington was awaiting a call from Moscow, while Moscow was waiting for Washington to take the initiative. The Geneva summit probably put a stop to this endless loop and will pave the way for the two sides to renew cooperation in several files:

1 – They will maintain military arrangements east of the Euphrates to prevent any collision. Moscow would also encourage Damascus and the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) to hold dialogue over operational and perhaps even political arrangements.

2 – Damascus would be pressured to respond to inquiries by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in return for restoring the government’s privileges at the group. The government was recently included in the World Health Organization’s executive board in the Eastern Mediterranean region and a Syrian special representative was appointed to the Special Committee on Decolonization.

3 – The ground would be paved for extending the international resolution on cross border aid that expires next month. The Biden administration is seeking the opening of three crossings, while Russia’s agreement to extend the opening of the current crossing – Bab al-Hawa – would be interpreted as a sign that it agrees to the continued cooperation.

Arab and regional countries will draw their own conclusions over the Putin-Biden summit and what it entails for Syria.

The implications of the summit on Syria will be revealed during the briefing by UN special envoy to Syria Geir Pedersen to the organization in New York on June 25. They will also be revealed when US Secretary of State Antony Blinken chairs the meeting of the small group of foreign ministers ahead of the meeting of members of the international coalition to defeat ISIS on June 28. The implications of the summit will be tangibly felt on July 11 when the Security Council votes on the cross-border aid resolution.

Some observers believe that these specific Syrian signals could expand to include other issues, such as Iran’s military presence in the war-torn country, especially if Washington and Tehran agree to return to the nuclear deal. This issue would in turn be tied to Damascus normalizing relations with Arab countries and its return to the Arab League. In return, it would receive help in its reconstruction.

Most Viewed

 
Features

10 Years after Europe's Migration Crisis, the Fallout Reverberates in Greece and Beyond

File photo: Migrants of African origin trying to flee to Europe are crammed on board of a small boat, as Tunisian coast guards prepare to transfer them onto their vessel, at sea between Tunisia and Italy, on August 10, 2023. (Photo by FETHI BELAID / AFP)
File photo: Migrants of African origin trying to flee to Europe are crammed on board of a small boat, as Tunisian coast guards prepare to transfer them onto their vessel, at sea between Tunisia and Italy, on August 10, 2023. (Photo by FETHI BELAID / AFP)
TT
20
TT

10 Years after Europe's Migration Crisis, the Fallout Reverberates in Greece and Beyond

File photo: Migrants of African origin trying to flee to Europe are crammed on board of a small boat, as Tunisian coast guards prepare to transfer them onto their vessel, at sea between Tunisia and Italy, on August 10, 2023. (Photo by FETHI BELAID / AFP)
File photo: Migrants of African origin trying to flee to Europe are crammed on board of a small boat, as Tunisian coast guards prepare to transfer them onto their vessel, at sea between Tunisia and Italy, on August 10, 2023. (Photo by FETHI BELAID / AFP)

Fleeing Iran with her husband and toddler, Amena Namjoyan reached a rocky beach of this eastern Greek island along with hundreds of thousands of others. For months, their arrival overwhelmed Lesbos. Boats fell apart, fishermen dove to save people from drowning, and local grandmothers bottle-fed newly arrived babies.

Namjoyan spent months in an overcrowded camp. She learned Greek. She struggled with illness and depression as her marriage collapsed. She tried to make a fresh start in Germany but eventually returned to Lesbos, the island that first embraced her. Today, she works at a restaurant, preparing Iranian dishes that locals devour, even if they struggle to pronounce the names. Her second child tells her, “‘I’m Greek.’”

“Greece is close to my culture, and I feel good here,” Namjoyan said. “I am proud of myself.”

In 2015, more than 1 million migrants and refugees arrived in Europe — the majority by sea, landing in Lesbos, where the north shore is just 10 kilometers (6 miles) from Türkiye. The influx of men, women and children fleeing war and poverty sparked a humanitarian crisis that shook the European Union to its core. A decade later, the fallout still reverberates on the island and beyond.

For many, Greece was a place of transit. They continued on to northern and western Europe. Many who applied for asylum were granted international protection; thousands became European citizens. Countless more were rejected, languishing for years in migrant camps or living in the streets. Some returned to their home countries. Others were kicked out of the European Union.

For Namjoyan, Lesbos is a welcoming place — many islanders share a refugee ancestry, and it helps that she speaks their language. But migration policy in Greece, like much of Europe, has shifted toward deterrence in the decade since the crisis. Far fewer people are arriving illegally. Officials and politicians have maintained that strong borders are needed. Critics say enforcement has gone too far and violates fundamental EU rights and values.

“Migration is now at the top of the political agenda, which it didn’t use to be before 2015,” said Camille Le Coz Director of the Migration Policy Institute Europe, noting changing EU alliances. “We are seeing a shift toward the right of the political spectrum.”

A humanitarian crisis turned into a political one

In 2015, boat after boat crowded with refugees crashed onto the doorstep of Elpiniki Laoumi, who runs a fish tavern across from a Lesbos beach. She fed them, gave them water, made meals for aid organizations.

“You would look at them and think of them as your own children," said Laoumi, whose tavern walls today are decorated with thank-you notes.

From 2015 to 2016, the peak of the migration crisis, more than 1 million people entered Europe through Greece alone. The immediate humanitarian crisis — to feed, shelter and care for so many people at once — grew into a long-term political one.

Greece was reeling from a crippling economic crisis. The influx added to anger against established political parties, fueling the rise of once-fringe populist forces.

EU nations fought over sharing responsibility for asylum seekers. The bloc’s unity cracked as some member states flatly refused to take migrants. Anti-migration voices calling for closed borders became louder.

Today, illegal migration is down across Europe While illegal migration to Greece has fluctuated, numbers are nowhere near 2015-16 figures, according to the International Organization for Migration. Smugglers adapted to heightened surveillance, shifting to more dangerous routes.

Overall, irregular EU border crossings decreased by nearly 40% last year and continue to fall, according to EU border and coast guard agency Frontex.

That hasn’t stopped politicians from focusing on — and sometimes fearmongering over — migration. This month, the Dutch government collapsed after a populist far-right lawmaker withdrew his party’s ministers over migration policy.

In Greece, the new far-right migration minister has threatened rejected asylum seekers with jail time.

A few miles from where Namjoyan now lives, in a forest of pine and olive trees, is a new EU-funded migrant center. It's one of the largest in Greece and can house up to 5,000 people.

Greek officials denied an Associated Press request to visit. Its opening is blocked, for now, by court challenges.

Some locals say the remote location seems deliberate — to keep migrants out of sight and out of mind.

“We don’t believe such massive facilities are needed here. And the location is the worst possible – deep inside a forest,” said Panagiotis Christofas, mayor of Lesbos’ capital, Mytilene. “We’re against it, and I believe that’s the prevailing sentiment in our community.”

A focus on border security

For most of Europe, migration efforts focus on border security and surveillance.

The European Commission this year greenlighted the creation of “return” hubs — a euphemism for deportation centers — for rejected asylum seekers. Italy has sent unwanted migrants to its centers in Albania, even as that faces legal challenges.

Governments have resumed building walls and boosting surveillance in ways unseen since the Cold War.

In 2015, Frontex was a small administrative office in Warsaw. Now, it's the EU's biggest agency, with 10,000 armed border guards, helicopters, drones and an annual budget of over 1 billion euros.

On other issues of migration — reception, asylum and integration, for example — EU nations are largely divided.

The legacy of Lesbos

Last year, EU nations approved a migration and asylum pact laying out common rules for the bloc's 27 countries on screening, asylum, detention and deportation of people trying to enter without authorization, among other things.

“The Lesbos crisis of 2015 was, in a way, the birth certificate of the European migration and asylum policy,” Margaritis Schinas, a former European Commission vice president and a chief pact architect, told AP.

He said that after years of fruitless negotiations, he's proud of the landmark compromise.

“We didn’t have a system,” Schinas said. “Europe’s gates had been crashed."

The deal, endorsed by the United Nations refugee agency, takes effect next year. Critics say it made concessions to hardliners. Human rights organizations say it will increase detention and erode the right to seek asylum.

Some organizations also criticize the “externalization” of EU border management — agreements with countries across the Mediterranean to aggressively patrol their coasts and hold migrants back in exchange for financial assistance.

The deals have expanded, from Türkiye to the Middle East and across Africa. Human rights groups say autocratic governments are pocketing billions and often subject the displaced to appalling conditions.

Lesbos still sees some migrants arrive Lesbos' 80,000 residents look back at the 2015 crisis with mixed feelings.

Fisherman Stratos Valamios saved some children. Others drowned just beyond his reach, their bodies still warm as he carried them to shore.

“What’s changed from back then to now, 10 years on? Nothing,” he said. “What I feel is anger — that such things can happen, that babies can drown.”

Those who died crossing to Lesbos are buried in two cemeteries, their graves marked as “unknown.”

Tiny shoes and empty juice boxes with faded Turkish labels can still be found on the northern coast. So can black doughnut-shaped inner tubes, given by smugglers as crude life preservers for children. At Moria, a refugee camp destroyed by fire in 2020, children’s drawings remain on gutted building walls.

Migrants still arrive, and sometimes die, on these shores. Lesbos began to adapt to a quieter, more measured flow of newcomers.

Efi Latsoudi, who runs a network helping migrants learn Greek and find jobs, hopes Lesbos’ tradition of helping outsiders in need will outlast national policies.

“The way things are developing, it’s not friendly for newcomers to integrate into Greek society,” Latsoudi said. "We need to do something. ... I believe there is hope.”