عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Features

The Culmination of American-Russian Military and Political Dialogue over Syria

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley meets with Chief of Russian General Staff General Valery Gerasimov for the first time since December 2019. (AFP)
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley meets with Chief of Russian General Staff General Valery Gerasimov for the first time since December 2019. (AFP)
TT
TT

The Culmination of American-Russian Military and Political Dialogue over Syria

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley meets with Chief of Russian General Staff General Valery Gerasimov for the first time since December 2019. (AFP)
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley meets with Chief of Russian General Staff General Valery Gerasimov for the first time since December 2019. (AFP)

In the past two weeks, two significant political and military meetings were held between American and Russian officials on Syria.

The first meeting was held between US President Joe Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin’s envoys in Geneva on September 15 and the second took place between Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark Milley and Gen. Valery Gerasimov in Helsinki on Wednesday.

Since Biden’s arrival at the White House and preparation for his summit with Putin in Geneva in July, Americans had informed Russian officials that any dialogue over Syria and resumption of the “Vienna secret channel” can only take place after the extension of the United Nations resolution on cross-border aid. This was seen as a test for relations between the new American administration and Moscow.

In July, National Security Council senior director for the Middle East Brett McGurk met with Russian presidential envoy Alexander Lavrentiev in Geneva, paving the way for an agreement on the draft resolution on cross-border aid. The talks included Washington’s agreement to Russia’s conditions, including funding the “early recovery” in Syria and easing sanctions, in return for Moscow’s vote in favor of the resolution.

On September 16, McGurk, Lavrentiev and Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Vershinin met in Geneva for the first time since the approval of the resolution.

A diplomatic report, a copy of which was obtained by Asharq Al-Awsat, said that assessing the results “differs according to the expectations”. The meeting marked a breakthrough in that Russian-American dialogue was resumed after coming to a halt during the term of former President Donald Trump.

Russia had reportedly criticized the US over several issues, including failing to provide Caesar Act sanctions waivers and failing to ease pressure on Syrian president Bashar al-Assad. The Russian delegation also expressed its irritation with the slow delivery of aid.

It hinted that failure to reach progress would force Moscow to refrain from extending the aid resolution when its six-month period expires in early 2022.

A western diplomat said that this would be reneging on a pledge offered by Vershinin to McGurk during a meeting they held in July.

The American delegation, meanwhile, demanded facilitating the delivery of international aid to all Syrians, moving forward the political process and work of the Constitutional Committee, reaching a nationwide ceasefire and suspending military operations.

The diplomat said the Americans were disappointed with the meeting because they believed that the Russians would “bring something to the table”, but they didn’t. There is a sense that the meeting was a “missed opportunity” to move forward the Syrian file. They also sensed that had the Russians wanted to push the file forward, they would have done so years ago. This explains why the file has dropped low on Washington’s list of priorities.

UN envoy to Syria Geir Pedersen and other officials were hoping for a Russian-American understanding that would lead to a breakthrough in the conflict.

Some officials said that Putin, during his meeting with Assad earlier this month, had urged him to push forward the peace process and Constitutional Committee in line with UN Security Council resolution 2254 and to take advantage of the openness showed by some Arab countries towards Damascus.

A European envoy said on Monday that Damascus’ approval of the Constitutional Committee to start drafting the constitution in Geneva next month took place at Russia’s request. It was also a response to the Arab openness towards Damascus.

As for the second Russian-American meeting, between Milley and Gerasimov, it tackled the broader strategic dialogue between the two sides. They stressed their commitment to avert conflict where their armies operate, such as Syria where the priority is high to fight terrorism and provide stability.

The US renewed its decision to keep forces in northeastern Syria and in the al-Tanf base. The Russians and Americans wanted to stress their commitment to exchanging information in counter-terrorism operations and fighting ISIS, especially with Russian jets striking the Syrian desert near the where American forces are deployed.

The diplomat said a suggestion was made to hold another Russian-American meeting, this time with Israel’s participation, with the aim of exchanging information. Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid had paid a visit to Moscow earlier this month and Prime Minister Nafatli Bennett is expected in the Russian capital in days for talks with Putin.

Most Viewed

 
 
Features

The Fragile Israel-Hezbollah Truce is Holding so Far, Despite Violations

Mariam Kourani removes a toy car from the rubble of her destroyed house after returning with her family to the Hanouiyeh village in southern Lebanon, on Nov. 28, 2024, following a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah. (AP Photo/Hussein Malla, File)
Mariam Kourani removes a toy car from the rubble of her destroyed house after returning with her family to the Hanouiyeh village in southern Lebanon, on Nov. 28, 2024, following a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah. (AP Photo/Hussein Malla, File)
TT
TT

The Fragile Israel-Hezbollah Truce is Holding so Far, Despite Violations

Mariam Kourani removes a toy car from the rubble of her destroyed house after returning with her family to the Hanouiyeh village in southern Lebanon, on Nov. 28, 2024, following a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah. (AP Photo/Hussein Malla, File)
Mariam Kourani removes a toy car from the rubble of her destroyed house after returning with her family to the Hanouiyeh village in southern Lebanon, on Nov. 28, 2024, following a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah. (AP Photo/Hussein Malla, File)

A fragile ceasefire between Israel and the Lebanon's Hezbollah has held up for over a month, even as its terms seem unlikely to be met by the agreed-upon deadline.

The deal struck on Nov. 27 to halt the war required Hezbollah to immediately lay down its arms in southern Lebanon and gave Israel 60 days to withdraw its forces there and hand over control to the Lebanese army and UN peacekeepers.

So far, Israel has withdrawn from just two of the dozens of towns it holds in southern Lebanon. And it has continued striking what it says are bases belonging to Hezbollah, which it accuses of attempting to launch rockets and move weapons before they can be confiscated and destroyed, The AP reported.

Hezbollah, which was severely diminished during nearly 14 months of war, has threatened to resume fighting if Israel does not fully withdraw its forces by the 60-day deadline.

Yet despite accusations from both sides about hundreds of ceasefire violations, the truce is likely to hold, analysts say. That is good news for thousands of Israeli and Lebanese families displaced by the war still waiting to return home.

“The ceasefire agreement is rather opaque and open to interpretation,” said Firas Maksad, a senior fellow with the Middle East Institute in Washington. That flexibility, he said, may give it a better chance of holding in the face of changing circumstances, including the ouster of Syria's longtime leader, Bashar Assad, just days after the ceasefire took effect.

With Assad gone, Hezbollah lost a vital route for smuggling weapons from Iran. While that further weakened Hezbollah’s hand, Israel had already agreed to the US-brokered ceasefire.

Hezbollah began firing rockets into Israel on Oct. 8, 2023 — the day after Hamas launched a deadly attack into Israel that ignited the ongoing war in Gaza. Since then, Israeli air and ground assaults have killed more than 4,000 people in Lebanon, including hundreds of civilians. At the height of the war, more than 1 million Lebanese people were displaced.

Hezbollah rockets forced some 60,000 from their homes in northern Israel, and killed 76 people in Israel, including 31 soldiers. Almost 50 Israeli soldiers were killed during operations inside Lebanon.

Here’s a look at the terms of the ceasefire and its prospects for ending hostilities over the long-term.

What does the ceasefire agreement say? The agreement says that both Hezbollah and Israel will halt “offensive” military actions, but that they can act in self-defense, although it is not entirely clear how that term may be interpreted.

The Lebanese army is tasked with preventing Hezbollah and other militant groups from launching attacks into Israel. It is also required to dismantle Hezbollah facilities and weapons in southern Lebanon — activities that might eventually be expanded to the rest of Lebanon, although it is not explicit in the ceasefire agreement.

The United States, France, Israel, Lebanon and the UN peacekeeping force in Lebanon, known as UNIFIL, are responsible for overseeing implementation of the agreement.

“The key question is not whether the deal will hold, but what version of it will be implemented,” Maksad, the analyst, said.

Is the ceasefire being implemented? Hezbollah has for the most part halted its rocket and drone fire into Israel, and Israel has stopped attacking Hezbollah in most areas of Lebanon. But Israel has launched regular airstrikes on what it says are militant sites in southern Lebanon and in the Bekaa Valley.

Israeli forces have so far withdrawn from two towns in southern Lebanon - Khiam and Shamaa. They remain in some 60 others, according to the International Organization for Migration, and around 160,000 Lebanese remain displaced.

Lebanon has accused Israel of repeatedly violating the ceasefire agreement and last week submitted a complaint to the UN Security Council that says Israel launched some 816 “ground and air attacks” between the start of the ceasefire and Dec. 22, 2024.

The complaint said the attacks have hindered the Lebanese army's efforts to deploy in the south and uphold its end of the ceasefire agreement.

Until Israel hands over control of more towns to the Lebanese army, Israeli troops have been destroying Hezbollah infrastructure, including weapons warehouses and underground tunnels. Lebanese authorities say Israel has also destroyed civilian houses and infrastructure.

What happens after the ceasefire has been in place for 60 days? Israel's withdrawal from Lebanese towns has been slower than anticipated because of a lack of Lebanese army troops ready to take over, according to Lt. Col. Nadav Shoshani, a military spokesman. Lebanon disputes this, and says it is waiting for Israel to withdraw before entering the towns.

Shoshani said Israel is satisfied with the Lebanese army's control of the areas it has already withdrawn from, and that while it would prefer a faster transfer of power, security is its most important objective.

Israel does not consider the 60-day timetable for withdrawal to be “sacred,” said Harel Chorev, an expert on Israel-Lebanon relations at Tel Aviv University who estimates that Lebanon will need to recruit and deploy thousands more troops before Israel will be ready to hand over control.

Hezbollah officials have said that if Israeli forces remain in Lebanon 60 days past the start of the ceasefire, the militant group might return to attacking them. But Hezbollah Secretary General Naim Kassem said Wednesday that, for now, the group is holding off to give the Lebanese state a chance to "take responsibility” for enforcing the agreement.

Over the final two months of the war, Hezbollah suffered major blows to its leadership, weapons and forces from a barrage of Israeli airstrikes, and a ground invasion that led to fierce battles in southern Lebanon. The fall of Assad was another big setback.

“The power imbalance suggests Israel may want to ensure greater freedom of action after the 60-day period,” Maksad, the analyst, said. And Hezbollah, in its weakened position, now has a “strong interest” in making sure the deal doesn't fall apart altogether “despite Israeli violations,” he said.

While Hezbollah may not be in a position to return to open war with Israel, it or other groups could mount guerilla attacks using light weaponry if Israeli troops remain in southern Lebanon, said former Lebanese army Gen. Hassan Jouni. And even if Israel does withdraw all of its ground forces, Jouni said, the Israeli military could could continue to carry out sporadic airstrikes in Lebanon, much as it has done in Syria for years.