US magazine: talk about Russia's successes in Mid- East, world is exaggerated

A US newspaper said that talk of Russian political successes in the Middle East and the world is exaggerated, and stressed that Russia came to Syria to protect an old investment, and that Iran and Hezbollah will not allow it to control Syria unilaterally.

 Foreign Policy magazine published an article about Russia's role in the Middle East and the world, where liberals in the West and conservatives alike seem to agree that Russia is re-emerging as a superpower with global reach, and Russian foreign policy experts themselves argue that it is better The West can accept his country's return to the international arena.

But the American magazine, in turn, believes that such perceptions, some of which tend to dramatize do not withstand the objective analysis.

The magazine says that Russia's GDP is slightly larger than that of Spain, whose population is less than a third of Russia's population, Russia's military budget is less than a tenth of its US counterpart, a fifth of China's and less than that of Japan.

Moreover, the successes of Russian foreign policy are exaggerated according to the magazine, what he argues is a success for President Vladimir Putin in Syria in 2015 against US President Barack Obama, giving him the upper hand in the ensuing conflict, in fact, it was not as much a result of Putin's actions as a partnership of a long-standing strategy between Moscow and the Syrian regime.

The partnership began in 1956 with the launch of Soviet arms sales and the training of Syrian pilots in Soviet-allied Czechoslovakia and Poland.

The Syrian regime made its first request for the deployment of Soviet bombers and fighter planes in 1956, but was then rejected.

In the wake of the Suez crisis and its confrontation with Israel and Turkey, the relationship developed into the Soviet Union becoming the main source of economic aid and arms to Syria during the Cold War.

Since 1971, Soviet warships and submarines began using the port of Tartus in Syria, and the two countries signed a strategic cooperation treaty in 1980.

The magazine believes that Putin's presence in Syria came to protect a long-term strategic investment in Syria, rather than action directed against the United States, in particular, the collapse of Bashar al-Assad would have led to either long-term chaos or victory for extremist groups, which in both cases was a blow to Russian interests.

However, it was not only the Russian air force that enabled the regime to recapture most of Syria, and because control of the territory was only by ground forces, the IRGC and Hezbollah fighters from Lebanon provided this aspect.

The magazine concluded that Iran and Hezbollah, which fought in Syria, did not come to share roles with the Russians, but in support of the Syrian regime for their own reasons, and will not allow Russia to control Syrian policy individually after the loss of many of their fighters, which ultimately means that the success of the Russians would be largely a relative success.

(T/S)

ANHA


Other news