"The attack, on a day when the Syrian government declared the end of a nationwide cease-fire and launched dozens of airstrikes in and around Aleppo, may spell the final end of the U.S.-Russia agreement. Begun just a week ago, it was intended to pause the fighting, allow aid to reach that city and other besieged areas of the country, and restart political negotiations to resolve the civil war. The deal also envisioned eventual coordination between Russia and the United States of counterterrorism airstrikes against the Islamic State and a former al-Qaeda affiliate," Karen DeYoung and Erin Cunningham write for the Washington Post.
"At the weekend Russia reacted with indignation after an air strike by the US-led coalition hit a contingent of Syrian troops in eastern Syria. US Central Command said the strike was a mistake and the coalition had been targeting Isis fighters. Russian officials accused the Pentagon of trying to undermine the peace deal. Syrian activists and medics, meanwhile, accused Russia and the regime of targeting the convoy," Geoff Dyer and Erika Solomon write for the Financial Times.
"Beyond the trust gap, there is the simple fact that Washington and Moscow do not agree on the principal driver of the Syrian conflict. For Washington, the Assad regime is the central reason the war has spiraled out of control — it has irrevocably lost its legitimacy, U.S. officials believe, and can no longer restore the status quo. For Moscow, it is the terrorist groups sowing chaos in the region that deserve the lion’s share of the blame. These different diagnoses lead to different prescriptions: Washington prioritizes a diplomatic process that will transition Syria’s leadership away from Assad, while for Moscow there can be no end to the conflict until terrorist groups are denied a safe haven and state institutions, especially the military, are in control of security," Randa Slim writes for Foreign Policy.