I see two problems with that. I don't see a current solution leading to 'progress after assad.' I think we may see an escalation by Iran when sanctions lift to directly counter rebels in stronger numbers. Russia doesnt seem to be giving up.
Getting an iranian deal puts a time limit on russia sinking in the ME sand. This could possibly contradict US strategy if russia and iran work together. That seems to be the case. That in my opinion may snowball, not in 3 years but maybe 10. Iran may very well dictate how world influence plays out in the next century.
What would happen if US has to get directly involved in Yemen? Wouldn't that mean direct confrontation with Iran and thus amplification in syria?
What if Russia consolidates what is left of syria and retains influence? Wouldn't US directly lose influence in the whole region? It seems that a loss here would create a petroyuan or petrorouble (only if they countered direct US assault, which may be possible)? Doing so may set the world back tens or even hundreds of years. (50 years ago no personal computer).
I have two questions.
Is Iraq still friendly to the US? Would it allow a pipeline if ISIS is dissolved?
How is ISIL against US interests other than creating a new islamic superpower? Wouldn't that just create a large oil block capable of a hegemony? (assuming oil demand doesnt change) ISIL's international attacks were not enough to warrant direct ground assault but great enough to help their rhetoric. Their rhetoric being anti west is a severe problem. Strategically they are golden for a pipeline. If SA could make a deal with ISIS for stability and to create a pipeline without calling for an islamic caliphate everywhere could work. Their anti west rhetoric would then just be a charade.
I dont really see ISIS other than a chaos buffer region for SA. I don't know if old Syria and Iraq exist anymore. It would probably benefit SA to consolidate an internationally friendly alternative to ISIS with many friends. You could build a pipeline up near the Euphrates if ISIL alternative had Ramadi. The iranian backed kurds may be a problem there as well as the potential russian backing of pkk. I think new iraq will be much more friendly to iran. The change of US rhetoric that ISIS is good now might cause a US logistical problem because the US needs to be mobilized and active in the region to counter a full on russian assault in syria.
In a chaotic region I dont think it is feasible to create an oil pipeline, thus russian influence will continue in eastern europe unless an alternative energy reserve is created. If a ceasefire happens happens favoring the US, SA, Turkey it will most likely involve ISIS/regime change ISIS. The US could back an Iranian pipeline which would piss off SA and ISIS may amplify to destroy that deal.