Diplomatic failures in the Syrian crisis

As Russia and China move to protect Assad, diplomacy is needed now more than ever

A ball of fire rises following a Syrian government air strike that hit rebel positions in the eastern neighborhoods of Aleppo. Hassan Ammar / AP Photo

Aleppo is on the verge of collapse as the Syrian army, with the help of Russia and Iran, levels the ancient city. ­Rebels fighting the regime will soon lose their last strongholds. Civilians caught in the crossfire face a fresh catastrophe after five years of horrific violence. There is no food, no water, no medicine and little hope. Amid this carnage Bashar Al Assad has reasserted his control.

Dialogue and diplomacy, as this paper has argued from the beginning, is the only equitable way to end the fighting and mend Syria. Simply put, there is no lasting military solution. However, the spirit of diplomacy appears further away than ever after Russia and China vetoed a United Nations Security Council resolution on Monday that called for a seven-day ceasefire in Aleppo.

Given the trajectory of the conflict in recent months, it should be of little surprise that Russia and China support the current onslaught. Since 2011, Russia has vetoed six similar resolutions on Syria at the Security Council. China has vetoed four. For Russia, in particular, Syria is a strategic front line in a clear push towards an aggressive foreign policy that has resulted in conflicts in Ukraine and Georgia. Mr Al Assad might be the president of Syria but after years of conflict and assistance from allies, he has become little more than a proxy for Iran and Russia.

Given the geopolitics at play, diplomatic efforts are needed now more than ever. That is why Saudi Arabia, ­Qatar, Turkey and the UAE have called upon the security council to hold an emergency session to stop the fighting and begin the rebuilding process.

The UN resolution would have helped ordinary people on the ground and laid the foundations for constructive movement towards ending this conflict. It is difficult to overestimate the scale of violence consuming the city since regime forces entered Aleppo on November 26 in an effort to flush out all rebel strongholds. This ceasefire would have helped those who need it most: civilians caught in the cycle of violence with little food, water and medical supplies.

There is no lasting military solution despite the regime’s recent gains in Aleppo. The country has been impossibly fractured through the conflict, and cooperation between the regime, rebel groups and interested foreign countries will be the only path towards a lasting peace. Sustainable peace will only be achieved through dialogue.