Why Russia is willing to sell arms to Syria
Russia, which has weapons contracts with Syria worth $5 billion, is increasingly resisting international pressure to punish its ally. Yesterday it did not deny a report of a recent arms shipment.
(Page 2 of 2)
Russia stands to lose about $5 billion in arms sales if UN sanctions are imposed on Syria, including current contracts worth about $1.5 billion, a CAWAT study concludes. In recent years Russia has modernized Syria's aging fleet of T-72 tanks and supplied 24 new MiG-29 fighter planes, as well as providing a range of anti-aircraft missiles, anti-tank rockets, and smaller arms. In various stages of negotiation are contracts to purchase $3.5 billion in new Russian weapons, including two diesel-electric submarines, more MiG-29 fighters, mobile Iskander-E missiles, modern T-90 tanks and various other weapons, including surface warships and helicopters, the study says.Skip to next paragraph
Subscribe Today to the Monitor
The loss of the Syrian market would be a huge blow to Russia's arms export industry, which has already lost an estimated $4.5 billion in lost contracts with Libya and as much as $13 billion due to UN Security Council sanctions against Iran.
"Syria has been a traditional ally and arms importer from Russia [since 1971) and so Russia has a very different view from the West's hope of overthrowing the ruling regime there," says Igor Korotchenko, director of CAWAT. "Therefore, Russia has put its stakes on providing political and military support for the Syrian regime, and Russian leaders believe this corresponds to the long-term national interests of Russia itself."
Not everyone agrees.
"I do wonder whether Russia's interests are best served by following these contracts. There are differences of opinion within Russia's ruling elite over this, but the group that sees Syria as a traditional ally that must be supported seems to prevail," says Alexander Sharavin, director of the independent Institute of Political and Military Analysis. "In my opinion, these arms contracts and the use of Tartous to serve Russian warships are important, but they are not so large" that they should be allowed to dictate Russian policy.
"Probably we should have changed these attitudes a long time ago, [because these relations with Syria] injure Russia and hamper our relations with the West," he adds.
No more Libyas
Everyone agrees that Lavrov's assertion that there are no internationally approved sanctions against Syria is technically correct. But most experts say the tone of abrupt dismissal toward Western concerns is new.
Russia's position is hardening because the Kremlin feels it was conned last year into acquiescing to a UN-approved no-fly zone in Libya, supposedly to protect civilian lives, which turned into drawn-out armed support for a rebellion that ended in the overthrow and murder of Libyan leader Muammar Qaddafi.
Lavrov complained that Western countries are secretly planning, and perhaps arming, Syrian rebels to carry out a similar ousting of Mr. Assad, again under the guise of humanitarian concerns. "Our partners in the West are in fact discussing a no-fly zone. . . No one can deny that (some forces) are smuggling weapons to the gunmen and to the extremists in Syria who are attempting to exploit the protest movement to achieve their goals of usurping power... There are other ideas being realized, including humanitarian convoys, in the hope they could provoke a response from [Syrian] government forces," he said.
Most Russian security experts consulted today agreed with Lavrov. Some pointed to a draft Russian resolution before the Security Council that calls for dialogue between the Assad regime and its opponents, and international condemnation of all violence no matter whether it originates with the Syrian state or the rebels.
"Russia is not concerned any longer with what they say in the West," says Alexander Khramchikhin, an expert with the independent Institute of Political and
Military Analysis in Moscow. "Russian leaders are right to see the double standards in play when the West complains about Middle Eastern 'dictatorships'. Is Syria really worse than Saudi Arabia or Qatar, or is the problem just that it's not a US ally? ...
"Russia's position on Syria is fair and balanced," he adds. "We want to see an end to violence on both sides, equal blame for both sides, and we are against any external interference in Syria."
Get daily or weekly updates from CSMonitor.com delivered to your inbox. Sign up today.