The fall of east Aleppo now appears imminent, pro-government forces having reclaimed almost all the rebel-held areas in days. It will be the beginning of the end for the Syrian rebels, who swept into the city in 2012, jubilant at the prospect of overthrowing Bashar al-Assad, but who in recent months have watched defeat approach inexorably. Russian airstrikes; the west’s decision not to respond militarily and its diplomatic weakness; Turkey and others’ decision to row back on attempts to oust Mr Assad ; and the election of Donald Trump not Hillary Clinton all pointed in one direction.
Tens of thousands are still besieged in east Aleppo with scant water, food, shelter and no remaining hospitals. The horrors the city has endured are notorious; it is “a giant graveyard”, “an end-of-the-world place” and “our generation’s shame”. The UN human rights office this week added deep concern over reports that hundreds of men had simply disappeared after fleeing to government-controlled districts; and over claims that jihadi groups had prevented civilians from leaving and have kidnapped or killed people asking insurgents to withdraw.
Even in a war that has proved so unpredictable, it seems hard for the rebels to reverse their losses when their backers show no sign of even maintaining support at current levels. They can expect their remaining enclaves to come under renewed attack. But as the UN special envoy Staffan de Mistura stressed on Saturday, the city’s fall will not end a Syrian conflict that in almost six years has killed hundreds of thousands and displaced half the population of 22 million.
Victory for Mr Assad in Aleppo will mean control of Syria’s five major cities, but only about a third of its territory. Islamic State still holds much of eastern Syria and re-entered Palmyra this weekend, in a battle reflecting the pressures on the government and its reliance on Russian air power. Kurds control a large part of the north-east. Rebels in Idlib province, on the Turkish border, are dominated by hardline Islamists, and rebel fighters hold a scattering of areas across the south. The regime is unlikely to re-establish control over much land it has lost and can expect a guerrilla war targeting areas it does hold, though Mr Assad may believe he can live with even an extended rural insurgency.
He owes his survival to Russia and Iran, not to his incompetent, incapable and exhausted troops; the forces winning this war for him are driving what comes next too. Russia does not intend to get stuck in Syria and has already held talks with rebels in Turkey. Whether or not those discussions prove serious, Iran and Mr Assad himself have a different agenda: a military, not political, settlement. Iran wants to secure its arc of influence across the region.
Neither Moscow nor Tehran have the money or inclination for mass reconstruction projects, which, in any case will struggle against ongoing violence. Syria’s economy lies in ruins, as well as large parts of its cities. Poverty, instability, the disintegration of the state and emergence of warlordism, the defeat of moderate rebels, the long-term presence of Iranian-organised Shia militias – especially where that leads to the displacement of Sunni communities – and the sheer hatred engendered by this savage war are all likely to fuel extremism. Even as Isis faces increasing military pressure, it, and other jihadi groups, will be able to offer a potent message that it stands for Sunni communities who cannot rely on the west or Sunni states such as Saudi Arabia, whatever promises are made. The potential repercussions across an unstable region are obvious (whoever carried out Saturday’s bombing in Istanbul, what lies behind it was not forged and will not be resolved solely within Turkey’s borders). They will be felt in Europe, already concerned for its security and anxious to halt the flow of refugees. But the greatest tragedy of Aleppo is that the suffering of Syrians will be no closer to an end when fighting finally stops there.
