Introduction
Aleppo is a critical opposition stronghold that represents an ideological thorn against the pro-government forces and a strategic position from which the eastern regions of government control can be contested. Likewise, the city of Aleppo is just as important to the pro-government forces as the opposition controlled areas are under threat of encirclement, with Aleppo standing as one of the last well fortified positions in the east. During the course of the fight for Aleppo, the impact on civilians have been tremendous as neither the opposition nor pro-government forces wish to give up this strategic point. To provide relief to the civilians, there have been several attempts to implement ceasefires to limited effect.
The fall of Aleppo seems to be an inevitability given the current circumstances as the opposition forces suffer a string of losses. From the perspective of the US, a call for ceasefire and accusation of human rights violations against the civilians of Aleppo is one of the few ways in which the pressure against the opposition can be lessened without direct involvement of US forces. While the US has been successful in rallying international voice against the Russians, the effect has been questionable. Even after Russia severe criticism and losing their seat in the UN Human Rights Council, they seem undeterred and the control of western Aleppo is likely to soon fall under the pro-government forces within a year.
While on the surface, a ceasefire in Aleppo may appear to run counter to the Russian's objective in routing the opposition in Aleppo, there is stratagem in which the ceasefire is being leveraged to their material, psychological, and political benefit. This is broken down to two parts: shaping the public perception of the Aleppo conflict, and conducting psychological operations to the inhabitants, both civilian and rebel, of Aleppo.
Public Perception
In the past months, international perception of the Aleppo conflict has been exceedingly negative, particularly against the frequent Russian air raids which have resulted in a high number of civilian casualties and damage to infrastructure. However, on October 20th, Russia initiated a unilateral ceasefire which they extended to several days, and were consequently followed by more ceasefires into early November.
The unusual circumstance of Russia unilaterally initiating a "humanitarian" ceasefire has allowed them to change the public perception of the Aleppo conflict. The initial ceasefire and the consequent extension were carefully crafted and were short in duration to serve two goals; to shape the narrative of the conflict and to respond in real-time to the movements and actions of the rebels, and by keeping the length of the ceasefire to a short duration, they are able to resume military operations on short notice.
The ceasefire was quick to be dismissed by the opposition, and in response, Russia was able to characterize the rebels as being unreasonable and more than willing to impose further hardship on the civilians of Aleppo. To maximize this opportunity, Russia continually extended the ceasefire, to which the rebels continued to dismiss, which has been publicized through western media to a limited extent, but seem to be gaining some traction nonetheless.
Although it isn't the case that Russia was successful in generating a momentous shift in western opinion of the Aleppo conflict, it has successfully planted the seed of doubt in the western dialog of a "moderate" rebel fighting against and protecting the civilians from the pro-government forces. The move to unilaterally initiate a ceasefire was a calculated move in which Russia would win in a number of possible outcomes.
- If the ceasefire successfully convinces the rebels to abandon the city, they would have control of parts, or the entirety of the city.
- If the civilians evacuate the city, they are able to resume military operations with greater force, allowing them to more quickly and effectively defeat the rebels.
- If the rebels refuse to leave, they allow the Russians to shape the narrative and appear as the unreasonable party.
Psychological Operations
The rebels in Aleppo have proven to be resilient in face of overwhelming technological firepower and being outnumbered by the pro-government forces. While the siege of Aleppo continues to have desirable effect in slowly routing the rebels from areas of Aleppo, they have shown their unwillingness to surrender the city. To expedite the fall of Aleppo, Russia has been employing psychological operations to exploit the distress of the citizens and rebels.
As a matter of the state of the human psyche on the battlefield, there are considerations to the frequency, and intensity of the bombardment of a fortified position in maximizing the negative psychological impact of a prolonged battle on an individual. An extended and intense siege of an entrenched position is commonly used in degrading the morale and mentally exhausting the enemy to reduce their fighting effectiveness. In the case of Aleppo, there are political considerations that prevent an outright indiscriminate and prolonged bombardment on the city. The advantage the pro-government forces have in superior equipment and numbers are mitigated by this fact and the Russian's answer to this has been to remove this mitigating element, whether by encouraging the rebels, or civilians, to abandon the city.
In consideration of a human's natural responses to a life threatening situation, they are inclined to either fight or flight. Given that the eastern area of Aleppo has been encircled by the pro-government forces, they are in a state of fight with limited means to flight. The brief reprieve in fighting with the offer of a means to escape in the conditions of the ceasefire aims to exploit that exact fight or flight response. The ceasefire also gives an opportunity for the rebels to reconsider their situation and likelihood of survival, whereas a constant barrage of attacks would give them no time to think. A lull in fighting can be a poison that breeds feelings of discontent and this pause in fighting gives them an opportunity to voice their discontent and doubt, which can spread amongst the members, breaking down morale and sowing distrust between the military hierarchy.
The temporary pause in the fighting also gives opportunity for dissension to breed from within the civilian ranks. While the civilians of Aleppo are non-participants of the conflict, they have been essential for the rebels in holding the city thus far by limiting the fighting capability of the pro-government forces. However, because of how reliant the rebels are in fighting an asymmetric war by leveraging the presence of the civilians, their departure from the city would compromise their ability to defend it. In response to the evacuation corridors set up by the pro-government forces, the rebels have prevented the civilians from leaving the city. This will likely have lasting consequences in the civilian's willingness to tolerate the continued presence of the rebels that brings continued suffering to their daily life, even if they are on some level, sympathetic to the cause.
If the pro-government forces can replicate this pattern of siege followed by a brief reprieve, the distrust within the rebels and between them and the civilians will grow. Given that Russia has been facing significant political fallout from the siege of Aleppo, by demonstrating that the rebels are just as unwilling to concede or make any concessions to limit the impact on the civilians, they have effectively redirected the criticism fielded against them.
As the last ceasefire come to a conclusion on the 4th of November, time will show how effective this strategy was in the long run. Time is of the essence for the rebels as they lack the necessary supplies to extend the fighting in Aleppo and rely on unreliable and infrequent humanitarian convoys to bring them food, water, and medical supplies. The counter-offensives against the government held areas thus far have been largely ineffective as the pro-government forces have taken fortified positions unlike when they were previously routed when occupying the outlying areas of Aleppo several months prior. It is likely that these counter-offensives are moves of desperation as the rebels have no good recourse save for abandoning the city.
As a matter of the state of the human psyche on the battlefield, there are considerations to the frequency, and intensity of the bombardment of a fortified position in maximizing the negative psychological impact of a prolonged battle on an individual. An extended and intense siege of an entrenched position is commonly used in degrading the morale and mentally exhausting the enemy to reduce their fighting effectiveness. In the case of Aleppo, there are political considerations that prevent an outright indiscriminate and prolonged bombardment on the city. The advantage the pro-government forces have in superior equipment and numbers are mitigated by this fact and the Russian's answer to this has been to remove this mitigating element, whether by encouraging the rebels, or civilians, to abandon the city.
In consideration of a human's natural responses to a life threatening situation, they are inclined to either fight or flight. Given that the eastern area of Aleppo has been encircled by the pro-government forces, they are in a state of fight with limited means to flight. The brief reprieve in fighting with the offer of a means to escape in the conditions of the ceasefire aims to exploit that exact fight or flight response. The ceasefire also gives an opportunity for the rebels to reconsider their situation and likelihood of survival, whereas a constant barrage of attacks would give them no time to think. A lull in fighting can be a poison that breeds feelings of discontent and this pause in fighting gives them an opportunity to voice their discontent and doubt, which can spread amongst the members, breaking down morale and sowing distrust between the military hierarchy.
The temporary pause in the fighting also gives opportunity for dissension to breed from within the civilian ranks. While the civilians of Aleppo are non-participants of the conflict, they have been essential for the rebels in holding the city thus far by limiting the fighting capability of the pro-government forces. However, because of how reliant the rebels are in fighting an asymmetric war by leveraging the presence of the civilians, their departure from the city would compromise their ability to defend it. In response to the evacuation corridors set up by the pro-government forces, the rebels have prevented the civilians from leaving the city. This will likely have lasting consequences in the civilian's willingness to tolerate the continued presence of the rebels that brings continued suffering to their daily life, even if they are on some level, sympathetic to the cause.
Conclusion
The unilaterally initiated ceasefire was a strategic move in which Russia sought to manipulate public perception and to conduct psychological operations against the rebels and civilians in Aleppo. The result thus far has been positive as the public perception towards the conflict has made a noticeable shift as the non-compliance to the ceasefire and counter-offensives against the government controlled areas result in collateral civilian casualties. The civilians being prevented from evacuating has made limited headlines in western media as reports by humanitarian third parties detail the usage of mortar to prevent safe evacuation and the use of threat and coercion against civilians that wished to leave.If the pro-government forces can replicate this pattern of siege followed by a brief reprieve, the distrust within the rebels and between them and the civilians will grow. Given that Russia has been facing significant political fallout from the siege of Aleppo, by demonstrating that the rebels are just as unwilling to concede or make any concessions to limit the impact on the civilians, they have effectively redirected the criticism fielded against them.
As the last ceasefire come to a conclusion on the 4th of November, time will show how effective this strategy was in the long run. Time is of the essence for the rebels as they lack the necessary supplies to extend the fighting in Aleppo and rely on unreliable and infrequent humanitarian convoys to bring them food, water, and medical supplies. The counter-offensives against the government held areas thus far have been largely ineffective as the pro-government forces have taken fortified positions unlike when they were previously routed when occupying the outlying areas of Aleppo several months prior. It is likely that these counter-offensives are moves of desperation as the rebels have no good recourse save for abandoning the city.
No comments:
Post a Comment