Russia appears to fan flames in Syria

RUSSIA’S military buildup in Syria will most likely prolong the life of the beleaguered government of President Bashar Assad, Pentagon officials and foreign policy experts say, but is unlikely to be a major factor in the campaign to defeat the Islamic State, and could further inflame and lengthen the conflict.

The arrival of four multipurpose warplanes at an airfield near Latakia, Syria, on Tuesday brought the number of tactical jets that Moscow has deployed to Syria this month to 32.

They further enhanced Russia’s ability to carry out airstrikes that experts say can give Syrian Government forces a badly needed boost on the battlefield.

Reconnaissance flights by Russian drones in the last week have all been over areas controlled by opponents of Assad some backed by the United States and its allies while avoiding territory controlled by the Islamic State.

If Russia takes the next step of sharing the intelligence with the Syrian Government or carrying out airstrikes against those groups, it could easily lead to an escalation in the conflict, prompting Arab governments to increase aid to rebels and frustrating the already-dwindling hopes for a diplomatic resolution.

Adel al-Jubeir, Saudi Arabia’s foreign minister, said that there were no circumstances in which his country would accept the Russian effort to keep Assad in power.

Jubeir hinted that if a political solution that led to Assad’s departure could not be found, the shipment of weapons and other support to Syrian rebel groups would be increased.

‘‘Whatever we may or may not do, we are not talking about,’’ Jubeir said. ‘‘There is a moderate Syrian opposition that is fighting against Bashar Assad, and this opposition is getting support from a number of countries, and we expect that this support will continue and be intensified.’’

US Defence Secretary Ash Carter warned last week that Moscow’s military buildup could amount to ‘‘pouring gasoline on a fire.’’ But as US officials see it, the buildup enables Russia to simultaneously pursue several longstanding goals.

They see Russia as trying to avert the collapse of the Assad government for as long as it can while Russia establishes its most important foothold in the Middle East in decades.

That military presence in Syria could remain in place even if Assad is eventually supplanted by a new government since Russia would be a part of any transition talks. And if Russia can also damage the Islamic State, then so much the better for Moscow.

In his address at the United Nations, Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, alluded to reports that thousands of volunteers had left Russia to join the Islamic State. ‘‘We cannot allow these criminals who have already felt the smell of blood to return home and continue their evil doings,’’ Putin said.

Peter Cook, the Pentagon press secretary, said Carter directed his staff to ‘‘open lines of communication with Russia on deconflicting’’ the military missions of the two countries in Syria, to ensure that American operations are not ‘‘disrupted’’ by Russia’s military moves in Syria.

But US policymakers say confronting the Islamic State is not necessarily Moscow’s priority.

While Russia’s deployment of its most advanced ground-attack planes and fighter jets does give Moscow the ability to make airstrikes against the Sunni militancy in Syria, the very first warplanes that Russia sent to Latakia were four SU-30 Flanker air-to-air fighters. Such aircraft, officials said, would be useful in expanding Russia’s military reach in the Middle East.

Given the fractured nature of the opposition, some analysts said, the Russian intervention can provide a badly needed boost to the Assad government.