Geopolitics

How ISIS Could Turn Assad Into A Western Ally

The jihadist movement is not only reshaping the situation in Syria — it might completely shift alliances across the region. Will Assad ally with Turkey, Iraq and even the West against ISIS?

ISIS fighters in Aleppo, Syria
ISIS fighters in Aleppo, Syria
Verda Ozer

ANKARA — So, it finally happened. ISIS, the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, has turned its attention back on Syria's strongman Bashar al-Assad, capturing and killing hundreds of his soldiers recently in the northern city of Raqqa, Syria.

This shift in the jihadist movement's strategy will most certainly affect Assad's politics — and likely the power balance across the entire region.

Expert opinions regarding ISIS have repeatedly proved to be wrong. First, the group was said to be focused on fighting against Assad. Only much later, people realized that the movement was acting largely in step with the Syrian regime, with their goals on the field matching up perfectly.

The Turkish government was the first to voice that view, which was later embraced by both UN and U.S. officials.

People then started to think that ISIS would be gone before Assad. But the Syrian president never left, and the jihadist organization surpassed him by becoming the largest — and most vicious — threat in the region.

Most recently, some said Assad and ISIS would never dare to attack each other. The theory has, again, wound up in the trash heap of would-be conventional wisdoms.

Will Syria turn against ISIS?

This is what I wrote in a column published in January: "ISIS is targeting Iraq's Shia government today, but it wouldn't be an issue for them to target Damascus or Tehran tomorrow. Turkey might expect the jihadist movement to leave the field as Assad's power and influence weakens. But the Iraqi situation shows us that the exact opposite must also be considered."

What is happening today is precisely that scenario. ISIS started targeting the Syrian regime after it no longer needed Assad. So, what's next? Above all, support for Assad will increase in Syria. With a growing fear of ISIS, people may settle to live under his rule. The Syrian opposition might also compromise as jihadists gain more and more power.

Bashar al-Assad in April 2014 — Photo: Xinhua/Sana

What aboud Syria's strongman himself? To this day, he watched ISIS fighters slaughter his opponents. Syria's UN Ambassador, Bashar Ja'afari, depicted the situation well in a discussion we had. "Who would say it isn't in his advantage if two opposition groups kill each other?" Ja'afari said. Yet one of them is now targeting his camp.

When Assad becomes the ally

This is what I wrote in another column: "Bashar al-Assad will join the anti-ISIS front once the jihadists target him. Turkey, the West and Assad may find themselves cooperating against ISIS."

The Syrian president needs to stand with his pro-Shia and Iraqi counterpart Nouri al-Maliki in the fight against ISIS. But that means also lining up with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani as he helps Maliki.

The situation is becoming much more complex. The U.S. now cooperates with Iran vis a vis the Iraqi context, paving the way for Iran to keep moving closer to Western countries. The next Iraqi government will also deeply depend on the U.S.

We can expect the U.S. to strike ISIS fronts as soon as the next Iraqi government is formed. Unconfirmed reports say drone strikes have already started. "If ISIS directly targeted U.S. interests, we might have made a limited strike," a government official in Washington told me last week.

Turkey will have no choice but join this developing anti-ISIS front. The same goes for Iraqi Kurdistan, as an ally of Ankara and Washington — and soon of Baghdad.

Iran, Turkey and the U.S. may soon find themselves with Assad on their side.

Keep up with the world. Break out of the bubble.
Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter!
Green Or Gone

How Climate Consensus Could Cool Appetite For Arctic Exploitation

As global warming melts the ice covering parts of the Arctic Ocean, new opportunities are opening up for the exploration of natural resources, including oil. But the accelerating cooperation on climate objectives could wind up saving the Arctic from both business and military interests.

The Prirazlomnaya oil platform in Murmansk, Russia.

Andrei Pronin/Russian Look
Carl-Johan Karlsson

Analysis

PARISMoscow is militarizing the North Pole ... China claims near-arctic state status ... Trump wants to buy Greenland ...

That sampling of headlines from the last few years is a testament to the emergence of the Arctic as a frosty point of potential conflict among the major geopolitical force reshaping our world. Most would still struggle to imagine why this distant place of drifting ice blocks and polar bears, historically considered a place too inaccessible and distant for governments to pay any mind, is suddenly emerging as a frontier of global power play.


So, what's really going on in the Arctic?

A new Cold War?

The most straightforward answer is — you might have guessed it: climate change. The glaciers and icebergs covering parts of the Arctic Ocean are melting away. In the last 40 years, the multi-year ice (the thicker part that stays throughout the summer) has decreased by roughly half, and estimates predict that the Arctic Ocean is heading for ice-free conditions by mid-century.

While that is bad news for the planet, as sea ice acts as a huge white sun reflector keeping our planet cool, it also means that lucrative resources such as oil, gas and minerals become increasingly accessible to the countries with territorial access to the Arctic.

Known as the Arctic 8, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Russia, Canada, Iceland and the U.S. each have claims to different territories that lie within the Arctic Circle. Currently, under a treaty called the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, signatory countries can exploit resources from the seabed out to 370 kilometers off their shorelines.

90 billion barrels of oil

While that might seem straightforward enough, the Convention also stipulates that if a country can prove its underwater shelf is an extension of its continental border, then its jurisdiction can be expanded deeper into the sea.

And so as the once-ice-covered resources are suddenly up for grabs, just as the technology for exploiting them improves. Several countries have already submitted papers to the UN claiming portions of the vast Arctic seabed. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the Arctic Ocean houses an estimated 90 billion barrels of oil — about 13% of the world's undiscovered oil reserves — and 30% of the planet's untapped natural gas.

The jostle for Arctic territory isn't news per se: Already in 2007, Russia launched a naval manoeuvre to plant a Russian flag (inside a titanium capsule) at the base of the North Pole. But the current scramble comes at a time when relations between the East and West have plunged to new depths — a fresh display being Russia's recent closing of NATO offices after the alliance expelled several Russian delegates for alleged spying.

Photo of a boat approaching a large iceberg in the Arctic Ocean

Boat approaching a large iceberg in the Arctic Ocean

Photo by Hubert Neufeld on Unsplash

An arctic arms race

Meanwhile, the old Cold War's main protagonists have been building up their military muscles in the Far North. In October 2020, Russian President Vladimir Putin adopted a new Arctic strategy involving rearmament of the Russian Arctic forces with the most up-to-date means of warfare, which will soon include a new air-launched ballistic missile that can be fitted with nuclear warheads.

Similarly, since 2020, the U.S. Armed Forces have announced one new Arctic strategy after another. Late last year, it reactivated the Atlantic Fleet — harking back to a time when the navy focused on operations in the Northern Atlantic — with the goal of countering both the Russian threat as well as China, which has declared itself a "near-Arctic state" as a way of expressing its desire for a seat at the polar table. More recently, the Joe Biden administration launched the "Arctic Warrior," an army training program to develop skills in cold-weather warfare.

Lawmakers play catch-up.

But tempting as it may be to view the Arctic through the prism of an ominous power struggle between Moscow and Washington, Europe remains the most important strategic theater for Russia and, so far, the broader approach of NATO — despite the U.S. advancing its interests — has largely been a hands-off approach to the region.

As Jan-Gunnar Winther, director of the Center for Sea and the Arctic, wrote in a recent article in Norwegian regional daily iTromsø, NATO is aware that the combination of climate change and more diversified business activities could have a destabilizing effect.

But on the other hand, lawmakers are busy catching up with new regulation, and the region features several cooperative bodies, such as the Arctic Council — the primary intergovernmental forum for promoting cooperation in the region — that have managed to stave off conflict in the past.

Managing Russia 

Even while Russia flirts with a version of its Cold War-era posture, the country is doing so with fewer resources and at a time when global military balance, especially with regards to air power, is tilted against it — making open aggression over the Arctic less of a worry for the alliance.

Another stabilizing factor is that northern countries by now have some experience in navigating Russian muscle-flexing in the region. Norway's relationship to Moscow has long been a tightrope between deterrence and defense through NATO, with bilateral efforts to accommodate and reassure its eastern neighbor. The six-million strong country may have urged NATO to pay more attention to the Arctic, but the official Norwegian government line is that Russia doesn't pose a military threat. According to Norwegian broadcaster TV2, the ambition of the newly elected center-left government is to strengthen relations with the Kremlin.

EU wants to ban new carbon exploration in the Arctic.

As for Sweden and Finland, they have in the last decade managed to walk a line of deepening cooperation with NATO without overly aggravating Moscow — and that's unlikely to change. The two countries share a neutrality policy, and have an understanding that a potential NATO membership would be a joint decision. As such, with climFinland sharing a 1,340-km border and difficult history with Russia, A Swedish-Finish application has so far been ruled out as a greater security risk than to formally remain outside the alliance.

Some are also hoping that increased global climate cooperation, like that seen right now at the COP26 in Glasgow, could replace some of the balance previously provided by a natural curtain of ice, with the Arctic Council in particular focusing on sustainable development and environmental protection.

Earlier this month, the EU put forward proposals that could see it pushing to ban the tapping of new oil, coal and gas deposits in the Arctic to protect the region from further disruptive climate change. What we can also hope is that as growing global players like China will try to gain access to the region, the polar nations will find new motivation to collaborate to protect what is theirs, and what is not.

Keep up with the world. Break out of the bubble.
Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter!
THE LATEST
FOCUS
TRENDING TOPICS
MOST READ