Putin might seem like “the man with the plan,” but that’s not going to make things easier for him in Syria.

Russia launched a number of air strikes in Syria Wednesday morning, their first such actions since beginning a military buildup in the country in recent weeks.

Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu claimed that the airstrikes were targeting positions belonging to the Islamic State of Iraq and Al-Sham, or ISIS. Major General Igor Konashenkov, the Defense Ministry spokesman, said that “in accordance with the decision by Supreme Commander of Russian Armed Forces Vladimir Putin, aircraft from the Russian Aerospace Force began today an operation which involves precision airstrikes on Islamic State land-based targets in Syria.”

Developments moved quickly through Wednesday. The morning saw President Vladimir Putin request that the Federation Council, the upper house of the parliament, authorize the use of the Russian armed forces in external operations, specifically Syria. This request was duly approved.

Also approving was the Orthodox Church in Russia, calling the fight against terrorism a “holy battle.” Patriarch Kirill was quoted in an official statement as saying that “Russia took a responsible decision to use military forces to protect the Syrian people from the woes brought on by the tyranny of terrorists.” It is expected that a council representing Russia’s main religions would release their own statement supporting Putin’s decision.

The Syrian government released a statement confirming it had requested the airstrikes. “The sending of the Russian air force came at the request of the Syrian government via a letter sent by President Assad to President Putin that included a call for the sending of the Russian air force within the framework of President Putin’s initiative to fight terror.”

Statements from both the United States and Israel give similar stories, that the Russians gave them about an hour’s notice before the attacks began, with the Americans being told to get their warplanes out of Syrian airspace immediately (they declined).

According to Konashenkov, 20 flights targeted 8 ISIS positions, including equipment and fuel depots, with “ISIS coordination centers” being “completely destroyed.” Russia’s claims that they were targeting ISIS positions was almost immediately challenged by the United States and sources on the ground in Syria. The Homs and Hama areas appear to be the target of the initial strikes, but not areas held by ISIS.

Instead, the areas targeted appear to be those being held by either units of the Free Syrian Army or those of Jaish al-Fatah (Army of Conquest), a coalition of Syrian Islamists that includes Ahrar al-Sham and the Al-Qaeda affiliate Jabhat an-Nusra and was responsible for the capture of Idlib earlier this year in a major blow to the Assad regime.

Khaled Khoja, president of Syria’s opposition Syrian National Coalition, lashed out at Russia after the airstrikes. “Russia is not fighting Isil (ISIS),” he railed, “it is using its military force to support the Assad regime’s war against civilians. It risks implicating itself in war crimes.” He went on to declare that “the international community should condemn Russia and take urgent action to protect Syrian civilians through the enforcement of a ban on aerial bombardment.”

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius added his government’s skepticism, saying that “as we understand it, these [Russian air strikes] were not zones that were controlled by Daesh (ISIS).”

An interesting development was the claim by the Russian government that the strikes in Homs were indeed on ISIS positions, and “what they [groups on the ground] call themselves doesn’t change” much. Sky News tweeted out a statement from the Russian government saying that “most of Free Syrian Army has joined Islamic State & airstrikes will continue for as long as army offensive lasts.”

If this is indeed the stance of the Russian government, then it represents a dramatic increase to the scope of their operations, that Russia is at war with (just about) everyone in Syria who isn’t fighting for President Assad.

Syrian rebels seem to have reciprocated:

Also, if Putin was hoping to get his ostensibly anti-ISIS coalition off the ground with Wednesday’s airstrikes, he will be sorely disappointed. Putin clearly thought that the refugee crisis hitting continuing to hit Europe would have leaders there scrambling to do anything to cut off the stream flowing to their borders. He also may have misinterpreted the statements of those like German Chancellor Merkel, who said that “we will have to talk with many actors. Assad will be part of that, but also others like the U.S. and Russia as well as important regional partners like Iran or Saudi Arabia.” Putin may have confused Western leaders’ approval of speaking to Assad or working with him as part of a transition to a new government to end the war as meaning that they supported Assad sticking around.

Putin also probably thought his speech to the UN General Assembly was a big hit. It wasn’t, at least not with those he was hoping to get on his side. The French signaled their feelings about Assad by opening a war crimes inquiry against him. British Foreign Minister Philip Hammond said to the UN Security Council that “The Assad regime created the environment in which extremism and Isil (ISIS) in particular have flourished. So we reject the advice of those who say the poison of Assad is the cure for the cancer of Isil.”

Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir jumped on Putin’s statements, telling journalists on Tuesday that “it’s inconceivable that there will be a political solution with President Assad remaining in power.” He also noted that Saudi Arabia would intensify its support for Syrian rebel groups. Given Saudi Arabia’s leading role in the Gulf, it can be safely assumed that neighbors like Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Jordan will be following that line.

Perhaps because of the ill will created by the crisis in Ukraine, among other things, Putin is not finding the sort of receptive audience he was hoping for. Contrary to what some alarmists were warning of, America is not losing the helm in the war against ISIS. Russian diplomats couldn’t conceal their displeasure with the American led-conference on fighting ISIS and countering violent extremism, which was attended by 100 world leaders on the sidelines of the opening of the General Assembly.

A Security Council session called for by Russia and chaired by Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov (Russia has the presidency of the Security Council this month) proved to be another venue where they were met by a less-than-enthusiastic response. The Western message was clear: we welcome more allies in the fight against ISIS, but we will not allow that war to become a cover for prolonging the life of the Assad regime.

Even at home, Putin is going to find Syria a hard sell. A recent poll there showed the Russian people decidedly rejecting “direct military support” for Syria and the deployment of ground troops. Which is unfortunate, because if Putin really wants to keep the Assad regime alive and more than just another statelet and Russian de facto protectorate, Russia will need to deploy more assets to Syria.

In a somewhat humorous reflection of American efforts in Ukraine, Russia finds itself propping up a very needy ally that often can’t seem to get out of its own way. If anything, it’s even worse for Russia in Syria than for America and its allies in Ukraine; the situation isn’t nearly as complicated. Assad’s military is poorly led, trained, and equipped, desperately needing Russia to rebuild it. Battles like the ongoing siege at Zabadani show how tough it is for pro-Assad forces to make gains even when they are the clearly superior force. It is hard not to see Russia being sucked deeper into the war in Syria, something that American officials have delivered a friendly warning about.

Putin can make all the promises he wants about a temporary mission with a limited number of Russian forces being deployed but, like Obama has found, those promises are hard to keep in the Middle East.