Russia

David Cameron may now have his bombing mandate, but he still has no strategy. The PM’s ‘hope for the best’ rhetoric yesterday was distinctly un-Churchillian: ‘I know that will take a long time and that it will be complex,’ he said, ‘but that is the strategy, and we need to start with the first step, which is going after these terrorists today.’ It is not much of a plan, and those in the know know it: from defence chiefs – some of them friends of mine – giving anonymous briefings, to Parliament’s own foreign affairs committee, and even the voters, whom polls show swinging ever further away from air strikes.

When MPs vote this week on Syria, they will have to decide whether intervention is right in principle. But there is another question: Will air strikes actually make a difference? As a defence and security contractor who has spent much of the last few years in Libya, I have serious doubts whether anything can be achieved without boots on the ground. The combined use of all the countries’ air forces alone will never eradicate ISIS anywhere without a coordinated ground effort. Putin understands this: Russia is making airstrikes while letting Assad’s Syrian Army mop up on the ground. By contrast, Cameron’s proposed involvement seems pointless and meaningless. He wants to

The complications of acting in Syria have just become more apparent. The Russians are fighting in support of Assad – but Turkey, a Nato member, is backing anti-Assad rebels and has just shot down a Russian Su-24 jet. The Turkish foreign ministry says that the pilots were warned ‘ten times in five minutes’ that they were violating Turkish airspace. The pilots managed to eject and video footage has emerged:- The aircraft came down near the Antakya mountains, where Turkmen rebels (backed by Turkey) are fighting Isil and Assad’s forces (blue areas, below). The Su-24s, owned by both Assad’s regime and Russia itself, have been bombing rebel positions for some time. Turkey has been warning

Just yesterday, Vladimir Putin criticised David Cameron’s decision  suspended all flights to Egypt. This afternoon, he has done the same – which suggests that the Kremlin now agrees with Britain that there is a strong chance that the Airbus 321 was downed by an Isil bomb. And if Putin does believe that, then we expect some kind of retaliation. Yesterday, the Russians were telling Brits to wait for the outcome of the investigation before suspending flights to Egypt. This afternoon, Alexander Bortnikov, head of the FSB security service, said: ‘Until we know the real reasons for what happened, I consider it expedient to stop Russian flights to Egypt. Above all, this concerns tourist routes.’

Yesterday I argued that if it became clear that the Russian plane was brought down over Egypt by a bomb, Vladamir Putin may be forced to reassess his Syrian campaign – especially in light of a strong counterattack by Islamic State on the ground in Syria. Today, as the bomb theory became the only plausible explanation for the catastrophe, the Kremlin is strongly hinting that such a radical reassessment is already underway. Maria Zakharova, a Russian foreign ministry spokeswoman, has today said on a Russian radio station it is no longer ‘crucial’ that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad stay in power. ‘Absolutely not, we’ve never said that,’ she insisted when pressed, adding

It now seems fairly likely that an explosion brought down the Russian passenger airline over Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula over the weekend. One Metrojet official has already suggested that the ‘only explainable cause is physical impact on the aircraft’ and they have ruled out technical failure or human error. If the ongoing investigation proves that to be the case, it will obviously have an immediate and catastrophic impact on Egypt’s already decimated tourism industry. A jihadist would have been able to infiltrate one of the country’s supposedly most secure airports to plant a sizeable explosive device on a specific airline. PR disasters do not come much worse than that – and just one

The United States has abandoned training rebel forces on the ground in Syria but not equipping them, or at least some of them, and over the weekend its military cargo planes dropped 50 tons of ammunition to rebel groups in the north of the country. All apparently reached their intended target: yet another hastily formed alliance intent on fighting both the Islamic State and the Assad regime. Alas, despite being created just days ago, in keeping with Syrian rebels‘ almost constantly shifting alliances, it confusingly already has two names: the Democratic Forces of Syria and the Syrian Arab Coalition. The former includes both Arab groups and the Kurdish YPG militia. However,