海角大神

At a United Nations Security Council session Wednesday, diplomatic efforts to maintain the 10-day-old Syria cease-fire appeared all but dead.

While United States Secretary of State John Kerry floated the idea of a no-fly zone 鈥� hinting that Russia was behind an 鈥渙utrageous鈥� attack on a UN aid convoy Monday 鈥� Russia announced it was sending an aircraft carrier with dozens of fighter jets to the waters off Syria.

鈥淟istening to my colleague from Russia,鈥� Secretary Kerry said of Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov at the UN session, 鈥淚 sort of felt like we were in parallel universes.鈥�

The cease-fire, he added, is 鈥渉anging by a thread.鈥�

Yet neither side is eager to confirm the widespread assessment that the cessation of hostilities is beyond revival. Despite the evident pessimism and estrangement, the two powers have serious motivations for not giving up, experts say.

鈥淣either Washington nor Moscow is happy with where things after just over a week of this cessation of hostilities, but neither is either anxious to see a collapse of the diplomatic process,鈥� says Michael Doyle, a professor of international relations at Columbia University in New York. 鈥淏oth have reasons to try to keep it going.鈥�

Strongest among them is the desire to keep the conflict contained and the country from splintering.

鈥淏oth sides have an interest in making sure this doesn鈥檛 escalate, both want to see Syria remain intact,鈥� says Professor Doyle. As during the Cold War, 鈥渂oth of them realize that containing this is far better than having it explode into the region.鈥�

Pointing fingers

At the moment, however, each power blames the other for bringing the agreement to the breaking point.

As Secretary Kerry implies that Russia was behind the attack on the aid convoy, Mr. Lavrov faults the US for not curbing rebel forces under its influence and criticizes the US-led 鈥渃oalition鈥� for the Friday attack that killed Syrian government forces.

Some Western experts are not convinced that Russia wants the cease-fire to survive. From Moscow鈥檚 perspective, the arrangement with the US might have helped legitimize Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad, but it also curbed the Assad regime鈥檚 freedom to act against all opposition 鈥� which Mr. Assad lumps together as 鈥渢errorists.鈥�

鈥淭he Assad regime and Russia seem to be greeting the apparent collapse of the John Kerry initiative with palpable relief,鈥� , director of the Atlantic Council鈥檚 Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East in Washington, on the center鈥檚 website.

Moscow will never force Assad to take the steps needed for a cease-fire to hold, Mr. Hof argues. Assad is too central to Russian President Vladimir Putin鈥檚 plans to defeat America鈥檚 鈥渞egime change agenda鈥� in Syria.

Mr. Putin 鈥渃annot, by definition, present Assad with an enforceable 鈥榦r else,鈥� 鈥� Hof writes.

Grounds for cooperation

Yet the US and Russia have no choice but to work together on Syria 鈥� if for no other reason than that they both are militarily involved, Hof adds in an interview with the Monitor.

鈥淲ashington and Moscow are condemned to constant, nonstop communication aimed at searching for a mutually agreed pathway to peace an quiet in Syria,鈥� he says. Each has 鈥渓ethal and very high speed aircraft operating in constricted air space.鈥澛� 聽

Russia also has an interest in joining forces against Jabhat Fateh al Sham, a leading militant group that until recently went by the name of the Nusra Front.

Russia sees the Obama administration鈥檚 desire for an end to hostilities in Syria as 鈥渁n opportunity to get American help to destroy the Nusra Front,鈥� says Hof, a former White House special adviser for transition in Syria.

Beyond that, he says, opportunities for cooperation get thinner. 鈥淚t looks unlikely at the moment that the US and Russia will actually find a way to work together beyond diplomatic generalities,鈥� he says. 聽

President Obama was one of the first to say he was skeptical of Russia鈥檚 determination to make diplomacy work in Syria 鈥� reflecting the widespread pessimism about the cease-fire鈥檚 prospects. Comparisons to the Cold War abound.

鈥淎t the height of the Cold War there were any number of conflicts in the Third World that were kept going and exacerbated by the US-Soviet rivalry,鈥� says Doyle, citing wars in Africa and Central America.

But he also notes that Vietnam was 鈥渁 severe proxy war multiples of magnitude higher鈥� than what is taking place in Syria. And yet the US and the former Soviet Union managed to cooperate on issues of interest to both.

鈥淭here鈥檚 still room for diplomacy,鈥� Doyle says. 鈥淭here was room for cooperation when the rivalry was double or triple the scale we have now,鈥� he adds, 鈥渟o it would seem it should be able to work today.鈥�