Tweet
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s continued survival is predicated on their Russian patrons to a large extent. So this shift from Moscow is really a crushing blow:
Russia will cease deliveries of arms and fighter planes to Syria until the situation in the country stabilises, an official said yesterday, a move that would ratchet up pressure significantly on Bashar al-Assad’s regime.
The announcement is the strongest signal yet of Russia’s hardening stance against its long-time ally, and will come as a blow to the Syrian president, who yesterday met with Kofi Annan to discuss a political initiative to bring an end to the crisis. The UN-Arab League envoy expressed optimism after the talks, saying he and Assad had “agreed on an approach” to end the bloodshed, which he would take to the opposition.
Annan did meet with Assad yesterday, and tried to enlist Iran and Iraq in his efforts to arrive at a peaceful transition today. But really, the best hope for a resolution lies with Russia getting tough. This potential denial of arms shipments would do the trick. But right now, only a deputy director, a midlevel military official, is on the record. Until I hear this from Vladimir Putin or his foreign minister, and until the shipments actually stop, I’m skeptical.
The foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, did meet with a Syrian opposition leader yesterday in Moscow, so that’s a more hopeful sign. For some reason Lavrov said he was working to implement the Annan plan, which is clearly inoperative at this point. But the symbolism of the meeting itself is significant.
Annan’s latest plan, which he said had agreement from Assad, is to stop the violence in the most violent areas, and then extend the cease-fire to the rest of the country. But nothing has really worked on this front yet. If you want to know when Assad will go, look to Moscow.
15 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Maybe the Russians remember what it felt like to be outgunned losing millions of Russian lives in the battles of Stalingrad and Leningrad? A virtual slaughter of millions of people. Then came the Russian winter…..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Stalingradhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Leningrad
It’s pretty clear that Russia will act in Russia’s best interests, which are:
1. Economic – as long as a country can continue to pay for arms shipments, the Russians are very unlikely to support dramatic regime change of any kind, for any reason.
2. Power balance – Russia fears containment and isolation and will always use whatever tools of statecraft it can to maintain good relations and influence with middle eastern nations.
Look for Russia to strengthen ties with Syria’s neighbors if and when Assad falls. I’m sure Lebanon might be willing to host a Russian naval base, and Iraq and Iran are always in need of Russian military hardware, especially Iraq, which has no fixed wing air force to speak of.
Like many in the world have given up on an America that would seem to have become a breeding ground for future oven tenders. To a bagger a job is a job.
The Russian Bear is a quixotic animal.
Much Like the American Eagle.
And the rest of the world has to suffer the consequences.
Putin, Obama…………. what’s not to love.
That Russian bear sure is moving slowly. Their real concern is an American-backed puppet taking power. Short of that, they couldn’t care less.
From the lovely quote….Assad looks like the little man on the wedding cake…(Sorry, I know the times are serious.)
For Russia, Assad is likely expendable if the Ba’ath regime or successor regime can negotiate a solution that both opens up the political process and continues the alliance with Russia. Their position is the counterpart to that of the US in Egypt, Yemen, and Bahrain–which all have had different outcomes. For the US Mubarak was expendable as long as the SCAF pursued a peaceful transition (and the successor regime honored its current international agreements–alliance with the US, non-aggression on Israel).
So now we watch to see if Russian pressure can unwind this conflict. For both Russia and China, their best strategy is not to provide the US with a clearcut enemy that neo-cons in the US can rally against. That does two things. It de-escalates international conflict and increases the internal conflict in the US.
Hillary Clinton’s remarks and the Chinese response threatened to push a bipolar conflict between the US/NATO and Russia/China/SCO. Russia has walked that back if it is pushing Assad again.
I do not think that in the long term Russia will be ceasing shipments of weapons to Syria. That Mediterranean naval base is convenient.
When Asad is killed (and, yes, he will be killed — it’s gotten that bad), the Russians will no doubt want to have a say in who is to replace him.
Thank you, Alice. Another bon mot.
And Russia has spent centuries and countless intrigues to secure open winter ports.
How does this report from a mid-level functionary in the Russian military bureaucracy square with Russia parking a battle fleet off of Syria’s Cost a few hours ago?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/9390177/Russia-sends-warships-to-Syria.html
Just curious here.
You killed the tone of the article with your link, nicely done. I agree, this is “look at what I say, not what I do” from the Russians. They don’t want to be seen as the aggressors in this brewing storm of blame, we’ve already tried pushing in a litany of ways. Just checking back to us makes them look a lot better, and forces us to show how committed we are.
Hinting at giving up versus sending warships to Syria. Mixed messages from Russia.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/11/world/middleeast/russia-sends-warships-on-maneuvers-near-syria.html?_r=1
Really?
Vyacheslav Dzirkaln, the deputy director of Russia’s service for military co-operation:
No new deliveries, says the deputy director of something. Syria has plenty of weapons from old deliveries, so it doesn’t need more, apparently. More ammunition for those old deliveries? Not a problem — it’s on the way. Russia is hardly giving up.
Telegraph, July 10
Russia sends warships to Syria
One explanation for the deputy director’s statement on the airshow sidelines is that it was orchestrated by the U.S. to tamp down criticism of its own Russian equipment purchases.
news report:
A group of U.S. House lawmakers is continuing to push the Pentagon to halt its buys of Russian-made Mi-17 helicopters [for Afghanistan] until Russia stops selling weapons to the Syrian government.//
The Mi-17′s are much more practical for Afghanistan than anything the U.S. manufactures.