WITH Russia now playing an active military role in Syria, it is difficult to say what direction this bloody conflict will take.

On Wednesday, reports emerged that Moscow had conducted its first air strikes inside Syria after Bashar al-Assad had requested Russian military help to fight the self-styled Islamic State.

Expectedly, the reaction from many Western officials has been circumspect; a US-led coalition has also been carrying out anti-IS air strikes for the past year while purposely keeping the Syrian regime out of the loop.

Know more: Russian parliament approves anti-IS airstrikes in Syria

Throughout the Syrian civil war, which has now entered its fifth year, Russia — along with Iran — has been the Assad regime’s principal foreign backer as Damascus has fought a brutal campaign against an opposition dominated by extremist outfits, including IS.

At the same time, it is also true that Russia has strategic interests in Syria as it maintains a naval facility at Tartus, giving Moscow access to Mediterranean waters.

Clearly, the Russians appear serious about their anti-IS campaign, as they have recently cemented an intelligence-sharing deal with Iran, Iraq and Syria to target the self-declared caliphate. Russian media has also reported that China is sending ‘military advisers’ to Syria.

The million-dollar question here is: how will the Western bloc and its allies — including Turkey and the Gulf Arabs — react to Russia’s entry into the Syrian theatre?

After all, while the West and its coalition partners oppose IS, they have no love lost for Bashar al-Assad either and publicly advocate regime change in Damascus.

In fact, over the past few days there was clear disagreement over the Syrian question at the UN between Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin: while Mr Putin said the best way to defeat IS was to strengthen Mr Assad’s hand, Mr Obama favoured a ‘minus-Assad’ formula.

While the Syrian regime and the rebels have both indulged in atrocities during the course of the civil war — which has been dragging on since March 2011 — and indeed while Mr Assad is no democrat, is regime change a viable option?

Washington and its allies should study the recent history of Iraq and Libya: while Saddam Hussein and Muammar Qadhafi were brutal dictators, their ouster via external intervention resulted in the virtual collapse of the Iraqi and Libyan states. Nations must have an organic relationship with democracy; it cannot be implanted from abroad.

The way forward in Syria would be for all regional and global powers — under UN aegis and keeping the Syrian government on board — to combine forces to dismantle IS. Once this is achieved, a negotiated settlement to the Syrian conflict should be the goal, bringing the Assad regime and the democratic Syrian opposition to the table to work out a solution.

Already, as per UN figures over 250,000 people have died in this conflict, while over four million have fled abroad. Without a peaceful settlement, the Syrian people’s nightmare will only continue.

Published in Dawn October 1st, 2015

On a mobile phone? Get the Dawn Mobile App: Apple Store | Google Play