Russia: Give us a good reason to jilt Syria's Assad
One Russian analyst summed up Moscow's resistance by saying, 'We simply don't believe Western leaders know what they're doing, and we're not listening to all that chatter anymore.'
(Page 2 of 2)
Moscow has taken a lot of heat internationally for vetoing two Security Council resolutions that would have pressured Mr. Assad to step down and potentially paved the way for greater outside involvement in the crisis.Skip to next paragraph
Subscribe Today to the Monitor
Russian foreign policy experts say that Moscow's unwillingness to back down on its refusal to license any foreign intervention is based on several factors, all of which have been clearly thought out and seen as rooted in national interest.
Russian analysts argue that any violation of national sovereignty is a form of neoimperialism which, even if packaged as a humanitarian intervention, tends to be wrapped up with the geopolitical interests of the intervening powers and seldom leads to better humanitarian outcomes. They cite most of the wars of the past decade, from Kosovo to Iraq to last year's NATO intervention in Libya (which Russia acquiesced to in the Security Council) to make their point.
"We were told that military interference in Libya would be limited to protecting civilians, but we were deceived, pushed aside once we'd let it get through the Security Council," says Pavel Gusterin, an Arab specialist with the official Institute of Oriental Studies in Moscow. "Why would we let them do this again?"
Russia does have major political and economic interests in Syria, a Soviet and Russian client state since 1971, including about $5 billion in arms contracts, and the use of a naval supply station at the Syrian port of Tartous.
But many Russian analysts insist that it's not so much about material interests, as it is that the West has simply not made a convincing case to Russia for why it should abandon Assad and assent to Western-led intervention in Syria.
"We think we know how the world works as well as anyone else, and our diplomats have been active in the Middle East for a long time. We do not have the slightest romantic illusion that something that comes after Assad will be better," says Yevgeny Satanovsky, president of the independent Institute of Middle Eastern Studies in Moscow. "We know that if the Assad regime is destroyed, Syria will dissolve in chaos...
"Our Western colleagues point to these terrible atrocities, such as the massacre in Houla last weekend, and say, 'We have to do something!' But your own Western track record shows that you get the regime change you wanted, then lose all interest in the humanitarian problems," he says.
"As for Russia, we've learned to base our policy on national interest. Not a single promise made to us by the West in recent decades has been fulfilled. We simply don't believe Western leaders know what they're doing, and we're not listening to all that chatter anymore. So, Russia's Syria policy will remain basically the same, and there is no significant debate over this in the Russian establishment today."