Please speak to me in small words.
It gives Russia influence in the Middle East and elsewhere. Other vulnerable regimes will turn to Putin for support. And Assad will allow Russia to use Syria as a base in the region.
Oh, probably a collection of things.
Assad allows Russia to have Military bases in Syria, because of their support, and it allows Russia to counter-balance American efforts to lead in the ME. That goes waaaaaay back, to well before the collapse of the USSR. And Putin is the Trump of Russia, in that he wants to “make Russia Great Again,” meaning recapture the Ukraine and other once Russian controlled states, and to have the world shake in their boots again.
as ive said before assad’s dad was a KGB ally back in the Ussr days and they sold him guns and such and he let them run operations out of Syria and they helped non secular Syria keep the religious fanatics down and annoy Israel
Putin and the Assad family have know each other personally for years from what I’m told
Is that small enough?
Russia has an important air and naval base in Syria which they want to expand. Russia, Syria, and Iran are in a proxy war against America, Israel, and Saudi Arabia. Russia wants to increase its own influence and decrease America’s influence. As a bonus, Russia is also the victim of terrorist attacks and wants to destroy jihadist groups, which is a nice fig leaf for other goals.
In additional to the basing and influence others have noted there is one more thing…money. Russia sells a lot of military equipment. They are a huge exporter of such tech. While Assad et al buy a lot, one of the things Russia has gotten out of this is a show case for their military hardware shown in combat. I understand that Russia weapons exports are up, and one of the reasons is probably that show case of hardware in Syria.
Putin also wants to combat ISIS and Islamic fundamentalists to discourage it in the former republics.
Regards,
Shodan
To begin with, if you leave a vacuum sure as hell someone is going to fill it.
The USA left two in the immediate region: the first one ISIS filled, the second Russia filled.
So yes, as above, a whole bunch of reasons but the leading one is it would have been rude not to given there was an almighty hole waiting for some nation with military reach and balls to occupy.
Ah like your intervention in the Lebanese civil war, so known for its great success in showing the “balls.”
indeed it is this simple - the base of Tartus is the only one the Russians have in the whole of the Mediterranean basin.
And add to this that the Clan Assad have been the close clients and allies of the KGB and the Russian military for more than forty years, it is not in any way hard to understand that the Russians have the direct interest in them continuation of that regime.
It is further the case that there is some opportunity to pressure the Turks which is of use and utility to the Russians always.
Actually I think it’s healthy to not have just one superpower dominate the region. It gives the people who live there a choice about whom they choose to ally with and whom they do not. The balance of power, so to speak, although one should always bear in mind Pope’s verses.
:)
ISIS attracted quite a few Russian terrorists … and Russia is perfectly happy destroying Syria if that means these terrorists all die … as a bonus Russia would finally get their big Navel base on the Mediterranean … they sure have been waiting a long time for this …
Russian motivations have been fairly obvious these past 300 years or so … their behavior in Syria right now shouldn’t be a surprise …
No finally to it - they have had that facility since 1971. What’s important about it is as Ramira noted it is the last one they have left.
Whether it is objectively relevant anymore in the post-Cold War era might be a reasonable question to ask. Then again its actual relevance may be secondary to its perceived relevance to the Russians - prestige can have a relevance of its own.
Putin is a firm believer in “The Once and Future Russian Empire”.
Until Lenin and Co. messed it up, Russia was one of the Great World Powers.
Their winters + huge swaths of the steppes to their west made “Invade Russia” a very bad idea.
You might want to note the Tzar Nichols II has a grandson who was a hemophiliac - as were many other grandsons of Queen Victoria of the UK.
The European Royal Houses were horribly inbred.
Many are certain (including me) that the old Empire will rise again. Putin has the “fire within” to make it happen NOW - whatever it takes.
Also note: a “warm water port” has always been high on the Russian/Soviet/Russian wish list.
The Black Ocean is nice, but has a bitch of a choke point.
Syria’s coastline is MUCH more attractive.
Between the fall of the USSR (I’ll give you even money that Putin was in on the order to send tanks into Moscow) and Putin, Russia sold of the rusting hulk of an aircraft carrier.
It was towed to Hong Kong (I heard that it was to be used as a floating hotel/casino. Did anyone believe that?).
China finished the construction and now has an obsolete carrier with the Russian lip.
You know that Putin is not happy to see that ship being launched by what was once a Soviet political child
Various other explanations have been put forward here, but I also wouldn’t discount that there may be some element of inertia. Syria was a Soviet ally for decades (originally for ideological reasons: the Syrian Baath Party was on the left and naturally gravitated to the Soviets), and the alliance survived the end of communism in Russia. Maybe the Russians, among other things, haven’t given enough serious thought to the costs and benefits of maintaining the alliance, especially when it involves military intervention, and continue to support Syria just because they always have.
At the fall of the USSR, that hull was in Ukraine and it was they that sold it to China.
According to the same intel consensus ‘we’* take as gospel when it comes to Russian hacking in the US, the Russians have done next to nothing against ISIS in Syria. In fact the Putin/Iran/Assad strategy seems to be to present everyone else with a fait accomplit where all opposition to Assad except intolerable Islamic radical groups like ISIS have been eliminated, as opposed to the harder task of eliminating all opposition to Assad. Then the eventual solution would be a govt with continuity with Assad as it relates to Russian and Iranian interests in Syria (though not to exclude their selling out Assad himself) which the remaining tolerable elements of Syrian society and the West are forced to coalesce around and accept in lieu of ISIS (or maybe somebody worse than ISIS by then).
Putin wants to die in his own bed, like any dictator, and save his family and wealth also from any reaction if he’s deposed. Personal commitment to various ideals may play a part but IMO it’s misleading to follow decorum too much and assume he’s acting like a democratic politician just because he’s called ‘President’. Self preservation, via distraction from Russia’s internal weakness and decline via an apparent restoration to the highest table as ‘superpower’. Syria is part of that show. Maybe a long term goal of a Russia where he could actually step down and live? but same general idea.
*seriously folks, I don’t personally doubt the US ‘IC’ consensus on either of those things, especially sticking to solid facts of what Russia has or hasn’t done, rather than what Putin ‘probably’ thought. The latter doesn’t figure into deciding if he’s really fighting ISIS.
Yes, though it should be acknowledged that some/many of the opposition fighters being hammered by Assad/Russians are in fact radical Islamists as well, just not of the ISIS/Daesh ilk.
Really if you look at it from Assad’s POV Syria’s recent strategy has been reasonably rational. Daesh is not only ostensibly a tougher nut to crack, but they are involved in their own two-front war ( at least ) and currently the Iraq front is much “hotter”. While they are pouring resources into Mosul and the east they have less available to assault the west. In addition Daesh mostly hold a large swath of low value desert in the east, while the rest of the opposition occupies more valuable real estate on average and territory that is closer to Assad’s own power bases. So Assad can afford to try stand on the defensive against Daesh in the desert for now while he tries to mop up the smaller fry. If he can accomplish that he can then, as you say, present a fait accompli to the rest of the world - “hey it is just me and Daesh now, who are you going to back?”
It’s a bit messier than that of course and hardly a plan guaranteed to succeed. Plus Assad is potentially throwing away a golden opportunity to try and pinch Daesh between him and the Iraqis. But eliminating Daesh is not a primary concern - preserving Assad is. From where he sits I imagine this looks like his best bet.
More specifically, a warm water port in the Mediterranean.
Russia is a day late and a Ruble short of good sea ports. Tartus gives them much better access to Europe.