Syria has turned into a playground for foreign powers, regional and international. One hundred years ago, the 19th-century French-British standoff was resolved through the Sykes-Picot Agreement. Now the region stands on the threshold of other deals, ones that may mangle its face and realign its borders to the interests of today's new breed of players. The Russians have arrived, in full force, carrying out dozens of air raids. The Western coalition has questioned Moscow's intentions, while the outcome of the raids mounted by the US and its allies is also unclear to many. Islamic State (IS) may be grabbing the headlines, but the name of the game is world confrontation of the type not seen since the Cold War. Intentions are not what everyone claims them to be, for deep down all want the same thing — a chunk of land to manipulate on the global chessboard. Note how the Iranians stepped up their presence in Syria as soon as the Russians arrived, how the Turks modified their position accordingly, and how the Chinese finally jumped onto the speeding bandwagon. While the UAE and Kuwait stand on the fence, the Saudis still insist that Bashar Al-Assad must leave office. But Egypt, which gained immeasurable backing from the Saudis in the post-30 June 2013 phase, is playing its cards close to its chest. During his recent trip to Moscow, President Abdel-Fattah Al-Sisi discussed Syria with Russian leaders. Both Cairo and Moscow have tried to arrange for peace in Syria, without much support from the Americans and their allies. A diplomatic shift is emerging, and may lead to regional frictions. If the two coalitions, one led by Russia and the other by the US, fail to work in tandem in Syria, Riyadh may choose to back one coalition while Cairo supports the other. This is not exactly the outcome we need at this critical juncture in the region's history. Cairo seems to support an inclusive approach to the Syrian crisis, one that allows for a united front to emerge in the country, with joint forces from the regime and the opposition confronting terrorist groups of the IS brand. This may turn out to be the endgame, and yet no one really can foresee the outcome of a conflict that now involves Russia, the US, most of Europe, Iran and a dozen or so armed outfits, some allied with the regime and Iran and some against. Arab leaders are aware of the risks involved and while they voice concern for regional security their actions are far less consistent than their apparent intentions. Sorting out Syria will not be easy, but it is perhaps a watershed for this region. If we manage to keep it together, the snowball effect of region-wide turmoil may finally subside. If not, we may soon be looking at a different map of the region, and one that may turn out to be as flawed as the map created by Sykes and Picot.
