By Genevieve Casagrande and Jodi Brignola
Key Takeaway: Russia’s involvement in Syria is facilitating
ISIS’s territorial gains, while also strengthening Assad. Russia is
supporting the Syrian regime’s
offensives
in Latakia, the al-Ghab Plain, and northern Hama. Russia also
intensified strikes on rebel-held northwestern Aleppo, likely to set
conditions for an imminent Russian-Iranian-Syrian regime offensive in
the area. U.S. defense officials and local Syrian activists reported the
arrival of hundreds
of Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)-Quds Force fighters and
other Iranian proxy forces in Aleppo over the past few days. Russian
strikes largely concentrated along the rebel-held supply route leading
to the besieged regime enclaves of Nubl and Zahraa northwest of Aleppo
City. If the regime can link with these enclaves, they will successfully
sever the rebel-held supply route from Aleppo City to the Turkish
border. Simultaneous regime offensives in both Hama and Aleppo Provinces
will likely fix rebel forces along multiple fronts and prevent them
from reinforcing their positions across northwestern Syria, resulting in
a loss of terrain for the Syrian opposition.
ISIS is benefiting from Russia’s strikes on the Syrian opposition. On
October 9, ISIS advanced 10 kilometers against rebels in northeastern
Aleppo, the largest advance by ISIS in the province since August 2015.
ISIS continued to conduct probing attacks against rebels northeast of
Aleppo City from October 10-14. The Syrian regime and ISIS have
historically leveraged one another’s offensives in order to advance
against rebel forces in the northern Aleppo countryside. Both ISIS and
the regime will likely capitalize on the effects of Russian airstrikes
on rebels. Russian airstrikes have thus far failed to deter ISIS from
launching new offensives and rather have facilitated ISIS’s seizure of
new terrain.
The following graphic
depicts ISW’s assessment of Russian airstrike
locations based on reports from local Syrian activist networks, Syrian
state-run media, and statements by Russian and Western officials.
High-Confidence reporting. ISW places high confidence in reports
corroborated both by official government statements reported through credible
channels and documentation from rebel factions or activist networks on the
ground in Syria deemed to be credible.
Low-Confidence reporting. ISW places low confidence in secondary sources
that have not been confirmed or sources deemed likely to contain
disinformation.
High-Confidence reporting. ISW places high confidence in reports corroborated both by official government statements reported through credible channels and documentation from rebel factions or activist networks on the ground in Syria deemed to be credible.
Low-Confidence reporting. ISW places low confidence in secondary sources that have not been confirmed or sources deemed likely to contain disinformation.