The Syrian civil war, which began in 2011, has been one of the most devastating conflicts of the 21st century. The conflict has resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths, millions of displaced people, with widespread destruction across the country. One of the key players in this conflict has been Russia by providing crucial support to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. This support has been a major factor in allowing Assad to maintain his grip on power despite facing significant opposition both domestically and internationally. In this article, we will explore the reasons why Russia has supported Assad in Syria and examine the strategic implications of this alliance for both countries. The relationship between Russia and Syria has deep historical roots that date back to the Cold War era. During the 1970s, the Soviet Union established strong ties with the Syrian government by providing aid, arms, and military support. However, after the collapse of the Soviet Union in the 1990s, Russia’s influence in Syria waned. It wasn’t until Vladimir Putin became president of Russia in 2000 and in Syria Bashar al-Assad that their relationship was rekindled. The shared Cold War history between the two nations played a role in strengthening their ties. Today, Russia’s influence in Syria continues to grow, and their alliance remains strong. Russia has been a key ally of the Syrian government in the ongoing Syrian Civil War, providing military support and aid to the Assad regime. This has put Russia at odds with the United States and other Western powers, who have called for Assad’s removal from power. Despite this, Russia has remained committed to its alliance with Syria, and it has continued to play a significant role in shaping the political and military landscape of the region.
Russia’s strategic interests in Syria go beyond just maintaining access to the Mediterranean port of Tartus. Syria is also seen as a crucial ally in the Middle East, and Russia has long sought to maintain its influence in the region. In addition to its military support for the Assad regime, Russia has also been involved in diplomatic efforts to resolve the Syrian conflict. In 2017, Russia, along with Iran and Turkey, brokered a ceasefire agreement between the Syrian government and opposition forces. This agreement helped to reduce violence in the country and paved the way for further negotiations. Russia’s involvement in Syria is also seen as a way to counterbalance the influence of the United States in the region. Overall, Syria is a key part of Russia’s broader strategic goals in the Middle East and beyond. Russia’s support for Assad can also be seen through a geopolitical lens. The Syrian civil war has become a proxy conflict between various regional powers, including Iran and Saudi Arabia. By backing Assad, Russia is able to align itself with Iran – another key ally – and counterbalance Saudi influence in the region. Moreover, by supporting Assad’s regime, Russia is able to project power beyond its borders and assert itself as a major player on the global stage. The intervention in Syria allows Moscow to demonstrate its military capabilities and showcase itself as a reliable partner for other authoritarian regimes seeking protection from Western interference. Putin’s support for Assad in Syria is indeed driven by his fear of state collapse, which he experienced firsthand during the secession of Russia’s North Caucasus republic in Chechnya. Putin sees the situation in Syria as an extension of this struggle, and he views the conflict as a battle between secular states and Sunni Islamism. Putin has long been wary of Islamic extremism, and he sees the Assad regime as a bulwark against the spread of radicalism in the Middle East. In addition, Putin’s support for Assad is also motivated by his desire to maintain Russia’s influence in the region. By supporting the Assad regime, Putin is able to project Russian power and assert his country’s role as a major player in the Middle East. Overall, Putin’s support for Assad is driven by a combination of strategic, ideological, and personal factors. Indeed, Russian President Vladimir Putin has consistently expressed opposition to international intervention aimed at forcibly changing regimes. This stance is particularly evident in the case of Syria, where Putin has opposed efforts to remove President Bashar al-Assad from power. Putin’s position is that any resolution to the conflict in Syria should come through negotiations and respect for Syria’s sovereignty, rather than through external military intervention. This perspective aligns with Russia’s broader foreign policy approach, which emphasizes respect for national sovereignty and non-interference in the internal affairs of other states, with the exception of his invasion in Ukraine of course. The Arab Spring was a series of protests and uprisings that began in Tunisia in late 2010 and spread across the Middle East and North Africa. The uprisings were largely driven by popular discontent with authoritarian regimes, corruption, and economic hardship. In 2011, the uprisings led to the overthrow of several long-standing leaders, including Muammar Gaddafi in Libya. Russia perceived the Arab Spring uprisings as a threat to its influence in the region, as many of the countries affected had long-standing relationships with Russia. Russia feared that the overthrow of these leaders would lead to the loss of its influence in the region. As a result, Russia sought to establish new allies in the region. Their support for Bashar al-Assad increased significantly during this time. Russia’s actions were driven by its own interests rather than a genuine belief in Assad’s leadership.
Indeed, while Russia’s official stance is that its involvement in Syria is to combat terrorism, in practice, it has been reported that Russian forces have targeted not only ISIS but also other anti-Assad groups. For instance, Russian airstrikes have been reported in the rebel-held region of Idlib, where anti-Assad groups coexist. These strikes have resulted in civilian casualties and have been seen as attempts to regain control of the region on behalf of Assad. Similarly, the Syrian army and Russian air force have increased attacks on rebel bases and weapons depots in Aleppo, Latakia, and Hama. These attacks have targeted various groups, including the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which controls parts of these provinces. These actions suggest that Russia’s military strategy in Syria extends beyond the fight against ISIS and includes efforts to suppress any groups that oppose the Assad regime. This approach aligns with Russia’s broader geopolitical interests in maintaining its influence in the region and supporting its ally, the Assad regime. Russia’s support for Bashar al-Assad, the President of Syria, has positioned Moscow as an important power broker in the Middle East. By backing Assad, Russia has become a key player in the Syrian conflict, which has been ongoing since 2011. Russia’s military intervention in Syria in 2015, which involved airstrikes against opposition groups, helped to turn the tide of the conflict in Assad’s favor. Russia’s support for Assad has also put it at odds with other regional and global powers, such as the United States and its allies, who have called for Assad to step down. This has further cemented Russia’s position as a power broker in the region, as it has been able to exert its influence in the conflict and shape the outcome of the conflict to some extent. Overall, Russia’s support for the regime in Damascus has allowed to establish itself as a major player in the Middle East, with significant influence over the outcome of the Syrian conflict and the broader regional dynamics. Some analysts believe that Russia’s stance on the issue is driven more by factors within the country itself, rather than external factors. Specifically, these analysts believe that the stance is influenced by the psychological complexes of the Kremlin’s ruling elite. This could refer to a variety of factors, such as a desire to maintain power, fears of external threats, or a desire to project strength and influence on the global stage. By supporting Damascus, the Kremlin sends a message that neither the UN nor any other body has the right to decide who should govern a sovereign state. This stance resonates with the Russian political class and public, reinforcing Russia’s image as a global power. However, it’s worth noting that this is just one perspective, and there may be other factors at play as well.
While geopolitical considerations play a significant role in Russia’s support for Assad, there are also humanitarian concerns at play. Russian officials have argued that their intervention in Syria is aimed at combating terrorism and stabilizing the country – goals that they believe are best achieved by supporting Assad’s government. However, critics argue that Russia’s support for Assad has only served to prolong the conflict and exacerbate human suffering. The Syrian government has been accused of committing numerous human rights abuses during the civil war, including chemical weapons attacks on civilians and indiscriminate bombing campaigns targeting civilian areas. In conclusion, Russia’s support for Assad is multifaceted, encompassing historical ties, strategic interests, fear of state collapse, opposition to regime change, counter-terrorism efforts, desire to play a power broker role, and domestic considerations. This complex interplay of factors makes Russia’s support for Assad steadfast despite international pressure. Russia is a significant arms supplier to Syria. It’s estimated that approximately 10% of Russia’s global arms sales, worth around $1.5 billion, are directed to Syria. These sales reportedly include ammunition, military training aircraft, air defense systems, and anti-tank weapons. However, as you rightly pointed out, these figures are estimates and may vary. In addition to supplying arms, Russia has also provided military aid and direct military involvement to support the Assad regime. This support extends beyond the fight against ISIS and includes efforts to suppress any groups that oppose the Assad regime. It’s important to note that the dynamics of international relations and arms trade can change rapidly due to various factors, including geopolitical shifts, changes in international sanctions, and domestic policies of the countries involved. Therefore, the information provided should be understood within its temporal context. In conclusion, Russia’s support for Bashar al-Assad in Syria is driven by a complex set of geopolitical interests. These include maintaining a strategic foothold in the Middle East, countering Western influence in the region, and protecting Russian economic and security interests. While the conflict in Syria continues to rage on, it is clear that Russia’s involvement will remain a key factor in shaping the outcome of the conflict and the future of the region.
Moreover, Russia’s presence in Syria is considered the nucleus of Russian expansion in the region. This presence has created the opportunity for Russia to flirt with Turkey-a prominent NATO ally – in an opportunity to weaken the front of the Atlantic alliance.
Putin sees the collapse of the Soviet Union as a major tragedy, and believes that it is necessary for Russia to regain its position as a key player on the world stage, and Putin has found in Syria one of the means that enables his country to regain that position. But the problem for the West is that it is not limited to Syria.
The signs of the Russian Bear’s return are appearing in more than one place. Putin has an influential hand in Libya, where he is supporting General Haftar’s forces against the internationally recognized government.
Russia is also a key supporter of the Venezuelan regime. Russia does not cease to play the role of a superpower in its surroundings, relentlessly pursuing its interests in Georgia and Ukraine.
In a narrow-scale military track, a lot is happening. NATO forces are developing and rearranging themselves for the sake of this new world, which is witnessing a renewed rivalry between the major powers.
More US troops are now deployed in Europe and the exercises are being conducted at a significantly increased pace and scale. But this problem is not military when investigating, but diplomatic and political.
Russian operations in Syria centered on the development of multi-layered defenses against terrorist drones and the use of precision strikes against targets included.Thus, the Russian military experience in Syria has proved invaluable for inventing updated methods of attack against terrorists in regions far from Russia and for promoting Russian national interests.
By supporting the Assad regime, Russian companies have been able to maintain existing trade relations and gain new access to Syrian resources. Contrary to expectations that the Russian intervention in Syria will become a “quagmire”, or a “new Afghanistan” for Russian troops, Moscow’s military campaign in Syria has had a mostly positive impact on Moscow’s vital interests as seen by the Kremlin.The intervention has significantly increased the chance of survival of the Assad regime, which remains one of Russia’s few loyal allies, while not proving to be too costly for Russia.
While the Russian forces were replacing the US forces after withdrawing from some bases after Turkey launched Operation Peace spring on October 9, 2019 against the people’s Protection Units in northeastern Syria. Since then, Russia has continuously intensified its military presence east of the Euphrates, including the areas under the control of the YPG, increasing the number of its military bases and outposts. There are currently 18 Russian military bases and positions in the YPG-controlled areas east of the Euphrates, namely in Hasakah, Raqqa, Manbij and Ain Al-Arab (Kobani) in Aleppo.
Syria has already become a turning point in the history of Russia and its experiences outside the borders, and perhaps Russia has succeeded a lot, overcoming its failures in Afghanistan, and it also reflects Russia’s strategy close to the US strategy, “sensing danger” outside the borders, albeit far away. Syria also represents a new influence for Russia to the Mediterranean Sea, enabling it to seize several regional files in order to secure its interests and impose its policies, within regional and international consensus.
All publishing rights and copyrights reserved to MENA Research Center.
