A big diplomatic push by President Barack Obama to bring humanitarian relief to Aleppo crumbled Monday when Syrian aircraft resumed bombing rebel positions after a week of formal cease-fire. Because of constant small violations of the truce, the humanitarian aid, intended to reach Syrian civilians cut off from supplies by a government siege of rebel areas of Aleppo, never left Turkey.

It was a sad ending to a well-intentioned, if quixotic, idea.

Under the plan, the United Nations was supposed to deliver humanitarian aid to Syria, and the United States and Russia were to cooperate in attacking the Islamic State and other terrorist groups.

But the brutal Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad clearly did not like the idea of giving the rebels any respite. And his government’s distrust of the American plan was heightened when U.S. and coalition aircraft accidentally attacked and killed more than 60 Syrian soldiers under the apparent impression that they were ISIS fighters.

That incident also highlighted the fiendishly complicated situation on the ground in Syria, where some rebel groups supported by the U.S. actually cooperate with others allied with al-Qaida and ISIS, both of which the Obama administration has pledged to destroy.

President Obama launched the drive for U.S.-Russian military cooperation against terrorist groups in Syria in a May letter to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

That was a notion enthusiastically endorsed by Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump. In July, Mr. Trump said in Winston-Salem, North Carolina: "Wouldn’t it be nice if we got together with Russia and knocked the hell out of ISIS?"

The plan is apparently now on the shelf, though, pending further U.S.-Russian discussions on the resuming the cease-fire.

On Monday, the State Department said it hoped to again halt the hostilities and planned to discuss options with Russian diplomats in Geneva today.

Meanwhile, news agencies report that the initiative for U.S.-Russian joint operations in Syria troubles Defense Secretary Ashton Carter and the U.S. intelligence community. They are understandably wary of the need to share U.S. targeting intelligence – and the marked differences in U.S. and Russian approaches to bombing targets.

Russia favors massive attacks, which can inflict large collateral damage on civilians. The U.S. prefers a precision-bombing approach designed to limit such casualties.

Beyond these technical and to some degree humanitarian concerns, there are also major questions about the planned cooperation.

Working with Russia to defeat terrorist groups in Syria, including ISIS, could mean overlooking Russian incursions in the Ukraine, and accepting Russia’s support of Assad, who continues to use chemical weapons despite his promise to give them up.

It also probably means ending sanctions against Russia for seizing Crimea from the Ukraine.

Mr. Trump has suggested that these concessions to Mr. Putin are worth gaining his cooperation in international affairs. That position by the GOP nominee has drawn sharp attacks from President Obama, the original author of the plan for cooperation in Syria.

The long-range benefits of cooperating with Russia appear questionable at best.

And the failure of the modest cease-fire effort to end the humanitarian disaster created by the Syrian civil war further signals continuing futility in the global community’s attempts to finally end the carnage.

– The (Charleston, S.C.) Post and Courier

Sept. 20

Newsletter