COMMENTS_ Syria: a Soviet hangover turned headache

Syria: a Soviet hangover turned headache

Russia inherited its Middle East presence from the Soviet Union. Is it about to lose its last ally in a newly democratised Arab world?

Comments (20)
Editorial
The Guardian,
Wednesday 1 February 2012
Article history


The uprisings in Libya and now Syria have pitched the Arab League, a body which had little relevance to conflicts raging on its doorstep, into the centre of the diplomatic arena. The league matters not merely because some of its member governments are becoming representative of their peoples for the first time in their recent history. Sunni monarchies like Saudi Arabia that are vulnerable to the very forces unseating Bashar al-Assad in Syria are also taking active steps. Granted, almost all of what the Saudis do in Syria can be seen as a way of rolling back Iran's influence. However, by pulling its members out of the Arab League observer mission and then making sure the mission is suspended, Riyadh has propelled itself into the frontline. It is no longer leading from behind.

The Arab League's activism on Syria put its general secretary, Nabil el-Araby, Egypt's former foreign minister, into an unusual position – proposing a plan to the UN which his own government has yet to endorse. It is encapsulated in a draft resolution to the UN security council which calls on Assad to step down and hand over to his deputy, who will oversee a political transition, or face further unspecified measures in 15 days' time. This has the potential to isolate Russia within a reshaped Arab world. Moscow has to address two questions as it prepares to wield its veto. First, as Assad's principal arms supplier, is it backing the loser? If so, it will lose not only the $550m deal it signed with Damascus for trainer aircraft, but the only base it has outside the former Soviet Union and a string of listening posts. The second question is more pressing: is it about to lose its last ally in a newly democratised Arab world, of which Syria will remain a vital hub whatever happens? Russia inherited its Middle East presence from the Soviet Union, but it did not gain any new friends. With Gaddafi gone and Assad on his way out, Russia stands to lose more than physical assets.

Russia could yet be assuaged by a clause explicitly ruling out the use of force. The current wording emphasises the need to resolve the crisis peacefully, but does not preclude future military action. Given what happened after the loosely worded UN resolution on Libya, which Russia let through, it has a point. But Russia is wrong to warn that the resolution will risk civil war. Continuing to back Assad, as it is doing, will propel a civil war. The sooner Assad sees he has no future – and even a watered-down resolution would help that – the sooner leading members of the regime will try to salvage something from the wreckage. The coming civil war will not guarantee the property of minority Alawites or the Sunni merchant class in Damascus and Aleppo. It will engulf them, and the score-settling in Libya will be as nothing to what takes place in Syria.

***

20 comments, displaying


dirkbruere
1 February 2012 1:12AM
It's last ally might be Iran - something for the USA to contemplate



DrChris
1 February 2012 1:33AM
If people are oppressed by their government, they can count on Russia to side with their tormentors every time.


jokaz
1 February 2012 1:42AM
Saudi Arabia is now giving Syria lessons in democracy have monitors on the ground! This has become a laughable matter!

This isn't about democracy and human rights as the western and most Arab media portrays, it about how much of a puppet the government is to escape scrutiny.


noterow
1 February 2012 1:53AM
Russia and Syria have a strong, traditional friendship that goes back several decades. The two countries and their peoples share common interests of keeping a lasting friendship and economic and cultural cooperation, and combating foreign interference in the affairs of western Asia. When Syria was languishing under western imperialism during 1920s-30s, it was Russia alone that gave strong moral support to the Syrian people. It was thanks in part to the vigorous support from Russia that the English and French imperialists finally withdrew from Syrian soil on 17 April 1946, known as Liberation Day in Syria. When Syria was subjected to foreign aggression, particularly by the Israeli regime, it was Russia again that firmly stood by the Syrian people. Russia has done a great deal to support Syria's freedom and independence, as shown by how the Russians granted favorable credit, helped to construct infrastructure projects, and the extensive military cooperation between the two countries. Without Russia, a strong Syria that can defend its freedom and independence cannot exist.



myfellowprisoners
1 February 2012 2:04AM
Response to noterow, 1 February 2012 1:53AM
Nice heartwarming story. However, there remains the problem of the mad bunch of sadists, crooks, torturers and murderers who comprise the Syrian government.

I'm rather inclined to agree with a previous poster that Saudi Arabia is in no position whatsover to lecture Syria on the joys of human rights and democracy, but when Assad finally gets his cocoa and ends up head-first in a storm drain, which, I hope won't be a long time coming, I won't be weeping for the grisly bastard.

And let's get one thing clear, the Russian government cares no more for democracy and the wellbeing of the inhabitants of Syria than the USA government does when considering their friends in Saudi Arabia.
I'm personally against all tyrants. Hard as it may be to compute.



noterow
1 February 2012 2:10AM
There are lot of problems with this editorial. The characterization of events in Syria and Libya as "uprisings" is demonstrably false. What occurred in Libya was not an uprising, but rather something like the fascist takeover of Spain in 1936-39, where the forces of reaction prevailed over the democratic forces due largely to foreign aggression. Similarly, Syria is not facing a popular uprising like what's been seen in Egypt, but instead a terrorist campaign like the contras in Nicaragua, against which the Syrians have every right to struggle and crush.


after the loosely worded UN resolution on Libya, which Russia let through, it has a point.


Not only the Russians oppose the outside meddling in Syria's affairs, but so does the rest of the world,including China. So it's not the Russian's who are isolated on Syria.


Granted, almost all of what the Saudis do in Syria can be seen as a way of rolling back Iran's influence.


The Saudis throughout the world, from Chechnya to Afghanistan, have been spreading their poisonous cult with the aim of stirring unrest and spreading their influence. From the Arab states, the Saudis are the biggest supporters of terrorism in the world, and forces from their country are involved in the financing and arming of the bandits that are fighting the Syrian government and Syrian people. Saudis have always played a reactionary role in the region with their struggle against the Arab and Islamic liberation movement represented by Egypt during Nasser, Libya during Gaddafi, the Islamic Republic of Iran, and now the progressive government of Syria.


is it about to lose its last ally in a newly democratised Arab world


What "last ally"? Russia is on friendly terms with almost all states in the region.


Russia inherited its Middle East presence from the Soviet Union, but it did not gain any new friends.


This is false. Russia and Iran had a difficult relationship during the 1980s, but the two countries have developed a good friendship over the last 20 years.


The sooner Assad sees he has no future – and even a watered-down resolution would help that – the sooner leading members of the regime will try to salvage something from the wreckage.


What goes on in Syria is an internal affair that is solely the business of the Syrian people. It is up to the Syrian people to choose their own government, not for America or England through the UN imposing their will on Syria.



Baccalieri
1 February 2012 2:25AM
Response to DrChris, 1 February 2012 1:33AM
Or if the US is about to screw your country over, Russia will normally oppose it




noterow
1 February 2012 2:43AM
Nice heartwarming story. However, there remains the problem of the mad bunch of sadists, crooks, torturers and murderers who comprise the Syrian government.


Assad is a good leader, and the Baath Party since 1963 has constructed a successful, prosperous country, a model for all others in the region. Syria achieved an anti-imperialist, democratic revolution in 1964, and the country has made big progress since that time, with improved living standards and political freedoms. The government nationalized banks and insurance companies, brought about agrarian reform, and expanded the state sector of the economy.


And let's get one thing clear, the Russian government cares no more for democracy and the wellbeing of the inhabitants of Syria than the USA government does when considering their friends in Saudi Arabia.


This a false equivalence. The Russians have long said that they support peacefully resolving conflicts in the region, and have emphasized the need for stability in Syria for the sake of the Syrian people's welfare as well as interests of countries around the world.

By contrast, the tyrants of the NATO aggressor bloc and the terrorist bands that they support are pursuing a strategy of bringing chaos to Syria in order to pave the way for regime change. You don't condemn any of this and see the need to defeat them, but instead repeat the malicious lies about Syria coming from anonymous "activists".


I'm personally against all tyrants. Hard as it may be to compute.


You put on this cloak of "objectivity", but what you're really doing is undermining the Syrian people's struggle against the foreign-backed terrorist bands that seek to turn Syria into another Iraq or Libya. Inspired by reactionary propaganda,you paint these caricatures about the evil dictatorship in Syria, the purpose of which is to support and justify the counter-revolutionary movement going on in the country.



guardiandoommonger
1 February 2012 2:44AM
Politicians doing what they do best. Spreading hate, fear, death and murder to humanity. The people running this world are mad. Power makes people mad.



Leondeinos
1 February 2012 2:50AM
Perhaps the Russians understand, based on past experience, that it is simply wrong for the UN to pick a side in a long brewing (and currently active) civil war.

Look at the results of the US intervention in Iraq and Libya. Almost immediately, the new moustaches have begun to show strength in the same way as their predecessors.

The places where the US did not intervene (Tunisia, Egypt) seem to be doing a bit better.



CraigSummers
1 February 2012 2:57AM
To the editor

Regime change is the only logical course of action in Syria. Throwing Assad under the bus, however, does not guarantee regime change or reform. Once Assad is ousted, the "temporary" replacement government must be carefully monitored to insure that power does change hands to the Syrian people.



JohnCan45
1 February 2012 3:11AM
Foreign relations are always marked by hypocrisy, but better a hypocrite than a consistent sinner. Or tyrant. Moscow is backing the wrong horse, and will end up losing the arms deals, the bases, the influence, all of it. Assad is going down sooner or later. Russia should help make it sooner, so thay can salvage something from this.



MichaelPetty
1 February 2012 3:20AM
Response to DrChris, 1 February 2012 1:33AM
Presumably Russia has learned from the USA.



ibneadam
1 February 2012 4:34AM
It is about time for Russia to move on. The leadership is still stuck in the past, it need to be forward looking and be on the right side of the history. I do understand, it is hard to kick the old habits.



DavidEG
1 February 2012 4:54AM
Bravo Russians!
Finally, they found the strength and courage to stand up to brutal US-NATO reign of "humanitarian" terror.
The world got a chance to be a safer saner from now on. In old cold war days "humanitarians" would think twice before attempting any of their "liberation" adventures, be it Iraq, Libya or Syria.



OliverHenrietta
1 February 2012 5:01AM
Response to JohnCan45, 1 February 2012 3:11AM
Foreign relations are always marked by hypocrisy, but better a hypocrite than a consistent sinner. Or tyrant. Moscow is backing the wrong horse, and will end up losing the arms deals, the bases, the influence, all of it. Assad is going down sooner or later. Russia should help make it sooner, so thay can salvage something from this.

Very true.

But still. The biggest loser in all this is the Mad Mullahs of Iran. They have lost their pivot into the Middle East and the capture of Iranians by 'the rebels' pretty much closes the door on Iranian expansionism into the Sunni areas. The large amounts of money and goods that The Mad Mullahs and Ahmadinejad have been supplying to Hamas and Hezbollah will dry up. Internal pressures inside Iran over the huge amount of resources trying to develop a nuclear bomb for ;peaceful purposes; and 'wiping Israel off the map' will go down the drain. The Mad Mullahs will soon see their own extinguishing and a less aggressive, possibly even democratic Iran will result.

Erdogan has refused refuge for Hamas in Turkey. Perhaps, looking around him, he suddenly sees that the immediate area has changed to 'accommodate' his aggressiveness. It is less friendly. Erdogan has made Turkey a pariah state.

Oh. The sheer horror of it all.



NunOfTheAbove
1 February 2012 5:19AM
The league matters not merely because some of its member governments are becoming representative of their peoples for the first time in their recent history. The second question is more pressing: is it about to lose its last ally in a newly democratised Arab world

These are democracies? In any meaningful way? Are they as democratic as the USA (a corporate dictatorship)? Is Egypt democratised yet? Is that in the same way Iraq, Libya and Kuwait have been democratised after USA led intervention

The sooner Assad sees he has no future
He only has no future because Western interests (big business interests) are forcing him out with the craven backing of the Graun. Why no pushing for regime change in Saudi Mr Rushbridger?

So Russia is bad for trying to stop USA meddling, the USA meddling is not mentioned



CarefulReader
1 February 2012 5:21AM
Russia inherited its Middle East presence from the Soviet Union. Is it about to lose its last ally in a newly democratised Arab world?


Democratised? Where? Only Tunisia has been a partial success for democracy. The rest of "Arab spring" was either suppressed by western-backed governments, or directly organized by them.



Harold5678
1 February 2012 5:22AM
Galioun's militia doing ethnic cleansing. They killed two families in Homs because they refused to leave the building. They killed a priest and two nouns in a convent. All in the name of freedom. Don't forget all media networks portray them as peaceful protestors... Please come and see for yourself. They hanged the witness who testified against Galioun's militia during the Arab league tour in the city. The list goes on and on. Family members begged for help just to reach the corpses. Why CNN refusing to the see the other side of the mirror? Who killed the French reporter? The opposition claiming it was a mistake but at first they've tried to frame Syria's official army. Thank God a Danish reporter witnessed the event and spoke the truth. What did Sarkozy do about it or the EU who originally wanted a detailed and official investigation from the Syrian government. Once the reality kicked in, I don't see anyone trying to gain justice for Gilles Jacquier. How come his country is not asking Galioun the father of the opposition to be accountable, especially that Galioun resides in France. Food for thoughts...



CarefulReader
1 February 2012 5:22AM
"Western-backed" dictatorships, I should say.

___________

What do you think ?

Các anh chị nghĩ thế nào, có ý kiến, phê bình gì qua bài viết "Syria: a Soviet hangover turned headache" và 20 Ý kiến- Phê bình từ "20 Comments" của đọc giả ?

Từ những nguồn tin tức khác nhau, và cũng từ bài viết trên, cùng nhữnng ý kiến, phê bình khác nhau, các anh chị nghĩ thế nào về "comment" cuối của nick CarefulReader đã cho rằng "Western-backed" dictatorships,... " ?


Chân thành cám ơn Quý Anh Chị ghé thăm "conbenho Nguyễn Hoài Trang Blog"
Xin được lắng nghe ý kiến chia sẻ của Quý Anh Chị trực tiếp tại Diễn Đàn Paltalk: 1Latdo Tapdoan Vietgian CSVN Phanquoc Bannuoc .
Kính chúc Sức Khỏe Quý Anh Chị .


conbenho
Tiểu Muội quantu
Nguyễn Hoài Trang
01022012
___________
CSVN là TỘI ÁC
Bao che, dung dưỡng TỘI ÁC là đồng lõa với TỘI ÁC