Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The White House downplayed Russia's decision to launch the strikes without coordinating with the
United States, and the State Department said ahead of the strikes that Russian involvement in Syria
could be an opportunity. But the Pentagon slammed the move and suggested Moscow's backing for
close ally Syrian President Bashar al-Assad -- who appears to be losing his grip on power -- will only
inflame the war there and could set back the effort to drive out ISIS.
The differences raise questions about the precise nature of the U.S. strategy for countering ISIS in
Syria, with Republicans criticizing the White House for ceding the ground to Russia even as some
observers suggested that the United States was letting Russian President Vladimir Putin gain a
toehold in order to ensnare him rather than American troops in the bloody conflict.
Russia gave the United States just one hour heads-up that it would be launching airstrikes in the
western Syrian city of Homs on Wednesday morning and told U.S. aircraft -- there to battle ISIS -that they needed to leave Syrian airspace.
Vladimir Putin steals Barack Obama's thunder on the world stage
The United States declined to do so, but having both air forces operating in the country raises the
specter of military mishaps between the two powers. The United States had anticipated holding
conversations with the Russian military on "deconfliction," so that there wouldn't be inadvertent
overlap, but that expectation wasn't met -- though it appears military-to-military talks will be held as
soon as Thursday.
Similarly, President Barack Obama received clarifications from Putin in a meeting Monday that the
Russian strikes would target ISIS, as the U.S. desires, rather than go after the opposition forces
fighting major Russian ally al-Assad. But that expectation also wasn't borne out.
Defense Secretary Ashton Carter said Wednesday that the Russian attacks, which the Kremlin said
were meant to target terrorists, didn't appear to hit targets under the control of ISIS, which
operates in the north and east of the country.
'Gasoline on the fire'
Carter told reporters at the Pentagon Wednesday the Russian airstrikes were tantamount to
"throwing gasoline on the fire" in Syria and that the moves, without a parallel effort to replace
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, could "inflame the civil war in Syria."
But the White House downplayed the Russian move and its dangers.
"I think the Russians have made clear that they're not interested in provoking a conflict," White
House press secretary Josh Earnest said. "Their actions thus far indicate that that's what they
believe."
And unlike Carter, who described the Russian means of informing the U.S. of its airstrikes launch as
"unprofessional," Earnest shrugged off any breach in procedure, saying the level of "upset and
surprise" at the White House over Russia's moves was "quite low" given Moscow's consistent
support for al-Assad.
JUST WATCHED
U.S. official: Russia airstrikes didn't target ISISReplayMore Videos ...
MUST WATCH
The Russian strikes are "the inevitable consequence of hollow words, red lines crossed, tarnished
moral influence, leading from behind and a total lack of American leadership," Senate Armed
Services Committee Chairman John McCain, an Arizona Republican, said on the floor of the Senate.
And Rep. Mac Thornberry, McCain's counterpart on the House Armed Services Committee, echoed
his comments on CNN: "What it looks like to me is the administration is willing to just run out the
clock. And even though they've got a year plus left, they don't want to engage."
"They just will sit back and let whatever happens happen," he continued. "The problem is, the world
is spiraling increasingly out of control, and it doesn't look like this White House is even wanting to
do something about it."
Indeed, many of the critics gripe that the White House -- frustrated by the lack of progress in Syria
and seemingly unable to devise an effective solution -- is willingly allowing Putin to insert himself
into the mess with the hopes he can stem the bloodshed.
Moscow looks to bolster al-Assad
Earnest replied by asserting Moscow's airstrikes were an attempt to bolster al-Assad, rather than a
play to fill a Middle Eastern power vacuum.
"Russia has treated Syria as a client state for quite some time now," he said. "Five years ago, that
client state was pretty stable, and right now, it's a client state that is in utter chaos, where the
leader that they have propped up for years is losing his grip on power. And I think that's a pretty
clear indication that Russia is not flexing its muscles when it comes to Syria."
But some analysts suggested that Russia may already have an upper hand in seizing the initiative in
Syria.
"Regardless of how much complaining we do about Russian intervention, or how skeptical we are
that they can actually succeed, the fact of the matter is that they have taken over the facts on the
ground," said Vali Nasr, dean of the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins.
"They have been much more aggressive in talking to everybody and everybody has been willing to
talk to them, whereas in the case of the U.S., we have been talking about doing diplomacy but our
diplomacy is not actually in practice."