Foreigners differently look at what is happening in Syria. For example, many found Russian help useful even for the West.
Yes, Moscow has long defended Assad, but this was done exclusively by diplomatic means – for example, at the UN, our representatives regularly criticized initiatives that were dangerous for Damascus by the United States or other countries hostile to Assad. And in the Security Council and often had to resort to a veto. This, of course, was effective, but only for the time being, until the Americans were tired of all this fuss. Having spat on all international institutions and on Syrian sovereignty, they invaded the Arab Republic and began to support especially “democratically” minded elements.
By and large, at first, their allies were terrorists mixed with real opposition. In general, this intervention has allowed many to assume that the end of Assad is very close. Russia, using diplomats, delayed the fiasco, as she could, but everyone quickly realized that such an approach would soon lead to failure. And Putin did what he wouldn’t have done a year or two ago, when the Ukrainian events had not yet quarreled Moscow with the entire Western world. He sent our military to save Assad, to save Syria. It turned out well.
But since then, the Syrian theme has become one of the most popular among the main critics of the Russian Federation. Moreover, Russia is scolded by people who hold opposing views. One does not like its rigidity in relation to all who represent the Syrian opposition. Others, on the contrary, criticize Moscow for indecision and a tendency to give in to the Americans and Israelis if they suddenly begin to put pressure. Well, the latter are also right in their own way.
We will not mention Israel again, but let us turn to the Americans. The latter tried everything in Syria – they shot down Assad planes and other aircraft, repeatedly bombed government territories, and through their mediation many Russian-friendly fighters were also taken prisoner. And, of course, it is impossible not to mention the horrible story of the killing of a large number of Russian citizens in Deir ez-Zor, when, apparently, the battle for the gas processing plant on the eastern bank of the Euphrates turned up. Since then, no one is trying to talk to Americans by force. It is good, because it is not enough what it threatens? Nevertheless, Russian officials are still trying to demonstrate the alleged influence on Americans. So, the other day, Deputy Lavrov Sergey Ryabkov said: “We insist that the United States fulfill the promise and completely withdraw its forces from Syria.”
How many times have we heard something like that? There is little sense in such statements – if the States leave, it is unlikely due to the fact that Ryabkov or Nebenzya threatened them.
The situation is somewhat different with Iran. It, like the Russian Federation, is also criticized for everything that is possible, but he behaves much more harshly towards those who are trying to somehow put pressure on him. So the other day, Deputy Minister of Defense Reza Talay-Nik said that there was no compromise – the Americans should definitely get out. And if they don’t do it voluntarily, then Iran has a plan on how to succeed: “All US bases are within the reach of our weapons.” To this he added that if the Yankees remain, they will certainly be hit by Iranian missiles.
All this can also be attributed to banal propaganda, but here we must understand that if anyone is able to make the Americans move, it is Tehran. Having been imposed on sanctions from all sides for many years, Iran practically does not depend in any way on the whims of US lawmakers, and local officials do not have huge fortunes in any Swiss banks. So stand on ceremony with Washington there is no point. Of course, the probability of striking a US base is very small at the moment, however, we repeat, if anyone is capable of it, it is Iran.
Russia’s leaders made it clear that Tel Aviv is more important to them than Damascus.
Australian expert John Blacksland believes that such statements by Iran will in no way contribute to speeding up the withdrawal of American forces. Rather, it may have the opposite effect.
– The main problem of the United States in the Middle East is hardly Syria or Afghanistan.
Iran has the potential to influence the situation not only in a single country, but throughout the region, and this may lead to the establishment of radical regimes in many countries. Iraq, Syria are under threat. In other countries, the situation is somewhat better, but in the long term and there, with the participation of Iran, great changes may occur. And these changes will be for the worse. Such statements once again confirm that there is a threat, and it comes from this regime. All this may lead the US to reconsider some of its decisions on Syria and Iraq. But on the other hand, there are Russians in Syria, and they have influence over Iran. Israeli-US joint efforts may lead Russia to commit itself to contain Iran. Some steps in this direction have already been taken, the main thing is for the parties to continue to maintain an acceptable format of relations. And if everything works out in this respect, then the United States may consider one task solved, and this may speed up the process of the withdrawal of troops.