Russia’s relationships with its client states have never been easy. Of course, managing client states is always a complicated exercise. The Kremlin’s closet is full of skeletons – Hungary (1956), Czechoslovakia (1968), Cuba (1962), Afghanistan (1980), Ukraine (2014) and so on.
What complicates Russia’s relationship with Syria, which has sometimes been referred to as a Russian client state, is that two strong-willed, highly self-opinionated leaders are also involved here – Russian President Vladimir Putin and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
Both enjoy unshakable clan support and can hold their ground. Assad is by no means a Russian protégé, and the interests of the two countries do not always overlap, either.
The Syrian government is fighting an existential battle, and it sees no reason to barter away its hard-earned victories in order to accommodate implacable enemies who refuse to reconcile with defeat and seek to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat.
In sum, Assad is hellbent on regaining Syria’s sovereignty and restoring its territorial integrity, no matter what it takes or the timeline involved – preferably with Russia’s help and cooperation. Assad is clear-headed that unless he achieves this objective, the predatory powers will not leave him in peace.
The Kremlin, on the contrary, has multiple goals, including objectives that are unrelated to the Syrian situation. These range from vanquishing the terrorist groups that include extremist elements from Russia’s restive Muslim population to Russia’s resurgence as a military power with the capability to fight expeditionary wars.
The intervention in Syria has signified post-Soviet Russia’s “return” to the eastern Mediterranean, while the establishment of permanent Russian military bases in Syria has assertively proclaimed Moscow’s intention to play the role of arbiter in Middle Eastern affairs.
Adversaries in the wings
And all this while hoping to achieve a level of engagement with the US, which would give gravitas to the rocky Russian-American relations and reduce Russia’s tensions with Europe.
Evidently, the divergent priorities need to be harmonized, as it is in the mutual interests of the two sides that differences are tackled with patience, care and sensitivity. Bringing them to the public domain can only be counterproductive, as adversaries waiting in the wings are keenly watching for just such opportunities to create discord and acrimony in the Russian-Syrian alliance.
However, Moscow recently broke this golden rule, even as writings began appearing lately, penned by Russian think-tankers and opinion-makers who carry the stamp of the Kremlin, voicing criticism of the Syrian government, including President Assad.
Among them, the most notable, perhaps, was the article titled War, the economy and politics in Syria: Broken links penned by former Russian ambassador to Syria Aleksandr Aksenenok, who is also vice-president of the influential Russian International Affairs Council (affiliated with the Foreign Ministry).
The article was patently written with an eye on the Western audience to convey a sense of annoyance toward Assad and signaled Moscow’s wish that his regime ought to switch its priorities from reconquering all of Syria to pursuing postwar development in the approximately 65% of the country that it controls at present.
The Kremlin’s viewpoint appears to be that it cannot continue to bankroll the war, and there is an imperative need to motivate the West and the Gulf Arab states to provide the funds for Syrian reconstruction. A high degree of frustration in Moscow is palpable in Aksenenok’s imputation that vested interests in Damascus could be seeking continuation of the war. He wrote:
“The war produced centers of influence and shadow organizations that are not interested in a transition to peaceful development, although Syrian society, including businesspeople and some government officials, have developed requirements for political reform … However, this requirement cannot be expressed openly in an atmosphere of total fear and domination by the secret services.”
Asia Times
Comments About This Article
Please fill the fields below.