Syria: Ivan Tsarevitch and the Grey Wolf

Posted: June 19, 2012 in Sideviews
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

What opportunities are there and what motives are there for the Russian position on the question of the manner in which way they could engage in the crisis in Syria?

There are different opinions about this, and sometimes, even completely opposite opinions do exist. Some are the opinion that Russia should have given up Syria a long time ago, and now only acts coyly on the stage of world politics to the public, others are convinced that Russia must intervene in Syria, has to send “peacekeepers”, and should fight on the side of the Syrian Army against the Americans and Gulf States and so on.

Even within the Russian people, both positions are represented, and my subjective impression is, that the last version, so the advocacy of an active intervention, clearly dominates, because most Russians understand, at least instinctively, that it is here also about very own Russian security interests.

But also the first option, namely, that they considered the attack on Syria as more or less irrelevant to Russia and any commitment there is to be superfluous – especially in liberal circles – is well represented. Both of these extreme positions are basically all wrong.

When you go to the right, you lose your horse

The position of “Oh let them there shift for oneself, but even that does not concern us!” is in the given situation a complete mistake. Even if one closes his eyes about the fact of the project nature of the various Arab revolutions (“Arab spring”) and the plans of the U.S. and the Gulf monarchies, which are flanked by several European countries and Turkey, so the real continuous disintegration of the vast geopolitical space from Algeria to practically almost to China leads to a volume of millions or even tens of millions of man who are fallen into misery.

The collapsed state structures do not function anymore in terms of a containment of crowds of people, and they will inevitably come over Russia and also over Europe. On one hand, every destroyed state presents a rich portion of potential refugees; on the other hand, this is yet another joist that is beaten out of the dam, which currently still holds back the millions.

However, if one takes into account the direction of the Arab Revolution projects, only a blind man is not able to see, who are the next in this series – depending on your taste, you can rearrange the positions there – Russia, Iran and Europe. The question is really only about the order, and there are now more people, who see Russia as the next candidate in this series.

It is in Russia`s direct and own fundamental interest to obtain, at least, some stability factors in this most dangerous region.

If one imagines only for a moment that Russia will be drawn into the conflict – and such conflicts will definitely be caused by the refugees from bordering Russia States and by the refugees who come over the Caucasus, Central Asia and Europe – it is always better to wage war on foreign territory than on own soil.

In the case of Russia this is a commandment, already because of the fact alone, that not everything is in order in Russia. Dagestan alone is already bad enough for the Russians. Thus, the preservation of stability in Syria is in the direct interest of Russia. After Syria, only the Iran would be the last plank in the dam. Sure, one could follow the principle of the Russian Sbornaja and hope for a miracle in the final minute, but as one has already seen, this brilliant tactic has not always delivered the desired result.

When you go to the left, you’ll find the Death

Despite these considerations, the conflict about Syria is, first of all, only a problem of Syria. Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian President, is in actually many ways the person who is directly responsible for what is going on.

It is the Syrian President Bashar al-Assad who had to impose a state of emergency since over a year, instead the abolishment of the state of emergency; he is the person who orders the mobilization, who orders to close down the borders, who orders to make the armed rebels, jihadists, Islamists, foreign mercenaries and their agents harmless and Bashar al-Assad is the person, who should have decided for harsh military operations against the bases of the terrorists, while pursuing an active and aggressive information policy, at least within his own country and for his own people.

It is the duty of the Syrian president to bring clarity within his gridlocked and bureaucratized elite. In other words, yes, those are his problems, and nobody but him alone they can solve these problems for him. By the way, it also would be no one’s duty to do so.

For precisely this reason, it would be fundamentally wrong to wage a war for Assad. That would probably be such a huge mistake like a perfect inaction in relation to the events in Syria.

When you go straight, you will suffer cold and hunger

A way out for Russia would be a position between these extremes. Russia has to formulate its interests in public and to follow those interests strict and to deal with those interests without wavering. And all parties claim to respect those interests.

At the moment it would be in Russia’s interest, to not accept an aggression, no war, from the outside in Syria. Under present conditions, even such relatively brittle and inflexible as the Syrian government fully capable, Lord of the rebellion to be – if this rebellion is not supported by an aggression on the part of the West and the Gulf monarchies.

Of course, “aggression” includes the financing, arming, training and supervision of the armed groups and militias in Syria. As it could be seen this February in Homs and as it was recently highlighted in the district of Latakia, the Syrian government is able to re-establish order under these conditions and to equally remove mercenaries and armed gangs.

However, a direct military intervention, even to a limited extent, would finally transform Syria into a blazing fire. Furthermore, it is Russia’s duty (and indeed a sacred duty) to ensure the safety of its citizens that reside in Syria. These are mostly Russian women who have married Syrians; these are veteran military and civilian personnel who have remained in Syria that was until recently a peaceful and beautiful country, after their service or work

Ultimately, it does not matter why they stay there – they are Russian citizens. Therefore, Russia must face the threat of a foreign military intervention, and to provide refugee camps and zones of safety for his people, their families and also provide this for all the refugees at all. Safety zones around these camps and other objects and commit to them (and to make it clear!), that all civilians into it obscurities are under Russian protection – if possible, Russia has even to evacuate the Russians in Syria.

And they have to liquidate all armed intruders in these areas, without to ask much who they are. It is known, that stupid men make use of power, while wise men only demonstrates their power.

Russia could in this course send some warships to Tartous (Tartus), and to ensure the safety of the port which is often called “Russian military base” also deploy a decent amount of naval infantry unites, and to impose a safety zone of any depth – for example, to impose a no-fly zone for the entire air space in the area of the Russian fleet with a radius of 100, 200 or 300 miles.

What the heck, the Russians have currently a maneuver and repair their boats. Who cares that the West flies to Damascus to bomb it – at least, not here along: who flies around in the vicinity of Russian ships commits a direct aggression. Probably, such a threat would not be taken too seriously, but the less likely it is that someone risked it and tries to see where the real borders of the Russian forbearance are.

Other, more effective means of power to avert the aggression are not really at the side of Russia. Russia can hardly intervene in an inner-Syrian conflict – if they exist to that extent – or to fight side by side with the Syrian army in the battle against the aggressors, this is really the duty of Syria.

But Russia has the ability to prevent or disturb an onset of aggression. The statements Sergey Lavrov must be accompanied with real demonstrations of power. As long as Russia still has this power, because in the worst case, Russia will soon have to use that power anyway, but no longer in Syria, but on its own territory.

Of course, only if the reforms of the Russian liberals, e.g. even worse, any “opposition” with the white or orange ribbons, have not already finally dissolved the Russian army and the country.

Recommended reading: The Tale of Ivan Tsarevich and the Grey Wolf



Image: nuttakit /

  1. Antifo says:

    U.S. politicans try to make us believe there was a “rebellion” against the Syrian government.

    Nothing can be more wrong than that!

    Syria: The Rebellion against the UN-Bureaucracy

    Feel free to translate this to English language. It would make me proud to help the Syrians in their heroic struggle for the Syrian Arab Republic’s independence.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s