Russia stands ground with Assad
After the U.S. attack on Syria, Putin’s government rushed to Syrian autocrat’s defence
MOSCOW— If Russia once maintained at least a semblance of distance from President Bashar Assad of Syria, it rushed to his defence after the missile strikes ordered by U.S. President Donald Trump on Thursday. The attack cemented Moscow more closely than ever to the notorious Syrian autocrat.
Even as the United States condemned Assad for gassing his own citizens and held Russia partly responsible, given its 2013 promise to rid Syria of chemical weapons, the Kremlin kept denying that Syria had any such capability.
By championing Assad and condemning U.S. “aggression,” Russian President Vladimir Putin seemed to be burying the idea that he could somehow co-operate with the Trump administration to end the conflict on his terms.
The solidarity with Damascus is likely to cause problems for Russia in the long run, analysts said, although Putin probably cannot be persuaded to loosen his embrace any time soon.
The Russian government often takes its time to react to major world events, but the Kremlin issued a prompt statement early Friday castigating the U.S. for the missile strikes on Al Shayrat airfield in retaliation for Syria’s chemical weapons attack.
The Russian defence ministry vowed to strengthen Syria’s air defence systems, sent a frigate on a port call, and froze an agreement with the U.S. to co-ordinate activity in Syrian air space.
“Putin made a choice — to underline that Assad is his ally,” said Alexander Morozov, an independent political analyst. “This will lead to Russia’s further isolation, but Putin will stand his ground.”
Morozov and other analysts consider the policy problematic for various reasons.
First, Trump and his secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, have painted Russia as at least partly responsible for the carnage among civilians that was fomented by the Assad government.
“Moscow’s main problem is not that the U.S. made a strike but that Trump and Tillerson have toughened their rhetoric on Syria and Assad,” said Vladimir Frolov, a foreign affairs analyst.
He added, “They have said that Russia is responsible for Assad’s actions and that it didn’t fulfil its responsibilities in terms of chemical weapons disarmament.”
The chemical attack in the Syrian town of Khan Sheikhoun on Tuesday killed more than 80 people and afflicted hundreds more. Turkey said Thursday that sarin, a banned nerve agent, had been used.
The U.S. responded by firing almost 60 cruise missiles at the airbase, which housed the warplanes used in the chemical attack. The local governor said five military men and two civilians died.
Second, in continuing deadly at- tacks on civilians, Assad seems to want to pursue a military victory at any cost, putting a lie to Russia’s statements that a negotiated settlement is the sole solution.
That risks dragging out a war that Putin has depicted at home as quick, cheap and easy at a time when many Russians have been struggling economically. Trying to keep the length and cost of the war down is a crucial reason the Russians will avoid escalating any conflict with the U.S., analysts said.
“Russia wants to end the conflict and to diminish its military and economic presence,” said Andrei Frolov, a defence analyst and the managing editor of the Moscow Defense Brief.
Third, the Assad alliance could undermine one of Putin’s main goals for entering the war: to try to make Russia a player on the world stage again as the indispensable broker in the Middle East.
Protecting Assad could further repulse countries Moscow has been courting, such as Turkey and Israel, analysts said — not to mention much of the world.
In the months immediately after Russia deployed its military in Syria, Maria Zakharova, the spokesperson for the Foreign Ministry, used to say things like, “We don’t support Assad; what is important for us is to preserve Syrian statehood.”
After the attack, the ministry cranked out a statement lauding Syria for its “fierce battle” against “international terrorism.”
The ostensible reason Putin deployed his military in Syria in September 2015 was to fight terrorism, but that is often dismissed as the sound-bite logic. Other goals, especially shoring up Assad, proved more important.
Putin wanted to resurrect Moscow’s old Soviet reputation as a global military power. Syria proved a showcase for new Russian weapons, and Russia has established two rare overseas bases there.
“Russia will continue to support Assad because he is the only guarantor of Russia’s military presence in Syria and hence of Russia’s military presence in the Middle East overall,” Makarkin said.
Finally, of course, Syria presented Russia with an opportunity to break out of the isolation that resulted from sanctions imposed by the West for its 2014 annexation of Crimea and destabilization of Ukraine.
The Kremlin thought that forging an alliance with the West on Syria would render illogical the idea of maintaining the economic sanctions. Trump, during his campaign, seemed to champion the idea, as well, questioning the need for sanctions, suggesting that Crimea probably did belong to Russia and repeatedly praising Putin as a strong leader. He endorsed the idea that the two countries together fight Daesh, also known as ISIL or ISIS.
While that raised suspicions in the United States of collusion, it was welcomed in Russia as a new dawn in relations.
The illusions began fading as Trump or his allies reversed many of those positions one by one, and the attack on Syria pretty much buried them.
“The rest of the pre-election fog has melted away,” Dmitry Medvedev, Russia’s prime minister, wrote on his Facebook page. “Instead of the masscirculated narrative about a joint fight against our main enemy, ISIL, the Trump administration has demonstrated that it will be fiercely fighting the legitimate government of Syria.”