US President Barack Obama was asked during a Tuesday news conference whether he still thought Russia had gotten into a "quagmire" in Syria, in light of Russian-supported regime gains in the country.
Obama was also confronted over whether the US would step up its assistance to Western-backed rebels to prevent the impending fall of Aleppo, the country's largest city, to Syrian President Bashar Assad's forces.
Finally, he was asked to respond to criticisms that Russian President Vladimir Putin had "outfoxed" him in sending troops to Syria, now that Russian airpower has helped the Assad regime win back vital territory.
Obama replied that he thought the Russian intervention in the country was still a sign of Moscow's weakness — and that he thought Putin had made a strategic commitment in Syria that Russia would not be able to sustain.
"If somebody's strong, you don't have to send in your army to prop up your ally," Obama said of Russia's support for the Assad regime. "You send in your army when the horse you're backing isn't effective."
Obama noted that about three-quarters of Syrian territory was still under the control of non-regime militant groups, and he opined that it was "not stopping anytime soon"— an implicit reference to the troubles Assad faces even if he manages to retake Aleppo and possibly an admission that the fall of the city won't change the US' approach to the country's civil war.
Obama said Russia's real quagmire was its long-term investment in a country that it could not stabilize without what Obama said would amount to a "long-term military occupation."
"The question is how can we stop the suffering, stabilize the region, stop this massive out-migration of refugees ... end the violence, stop the bombing of schools and hospitals and innocent civilians, stop creating a safe haven for ISIS, and there's nothing that's happened over the last several weeks that points to those issues being solved," Obama said.
"And that is what I mean by a quagmire," he added.
Obama's answer revealed a low level of confidence in efforts to resolve the Syrian civil war diplomatically. Last week, a group of international stakeholders that included the US and Russia announced a timeline for a "cessation of hostilities" and the negotiation of a cease-fire.
In addition to his comment that he saw "nothing that's happened over the last several weeks" pointing to a solution to the conflict's underlying issues, Obama said opposition forces were unlikely to respect a planned cessation if Russia didn't halt its bombing campaign.
"If Russia continues indiscriminate bombing of the sort that we've seeing, it's fair to say we're not going to see any take-up by the opposition," Obama said.
Obama's comments also seemed to assume that the Russian leadership has a potential self-interest in a negotiated solution to the Syria conflict.
"The real question we should be asking is: What is it what Russia thinks it gains if it gets a country that's been completely destroyed as an ally that it now has to perpetually spend billions of dollars to prop up?" Obama said.
Russia might not need to make this kind of a long-term commitment if it succeeds in wiping out the country's non-jihadist opposition — a possibility if Aleppo falls.
And Russia's behavior in Syria suggests the Kremlin still believes that its level of commitment is a worthwhile strategic trade-off — and that a weakened Assad regime advances Moscow's regional and global position more than a negotiated transition of power.
SEE ALSO: A new peace deal for Syria effectively gives Russia and Assad 'a license to kill'
Join the conversation about this story »
NOW WATCH: A Femen protester appeared to hang herself to protest the Iranian president's visit to France