What Putin wants from military intervention in Ukraine and the middle East? What Putin wants from trump? All wonder what is after “king”, embittered after the assassination of the Russian Ambassador in Turkey?
We know that Putin’s actions are based on revenge to the West and the desire to destabilize European and American society. We must not forget that a large part of its history, Russia was limited to its territory. All the time highly appreciated the Ukrainian Crimea. After its annexation by Catherine II, there was established the port of Sevastopol, which later became the base of the Russian Navy in the Black sea. Odessa was established as a trading port. However, the collapse of the Soviet Union, which resulted, in particular, to the independence of Ukraine has deprived Moscow and Odessa and Sevastopol.
Intervention in Syria
Intervention in Syria in September 2015 was the first such significant Russian military operation in the region after 1772, when the Russian troops occupied Beirut (then a fortress on the coast of Ottoman Syria). The Russian appeared in the middle of a boiling pot of inter-ethnic conflicts, therefore, tried to complete its presence, resorting to military power and the force of arms.
But what forced Putin to intervene in the conflict hundreds of miles from the Russian border, if still ongoing war in Ukraine? Still don’t understand some actions of the Kremlin. For example, the three military interventions: in 2008 — in Georgia in 2014 in the Crimea, and in 2014 and 2015 in the South-East of Ukraine.
There is no single answer to the question that connects these points: does Moscow confrontation, the dismantling of NATO and the weakening of Europe, or to return its former power that was lost in the era of Gorbachev and Yeltsin.
Another question is: how will the West put Russia in a difficult position by agreeing to a limited partnership on the issue of combating radical Islam in Syria? Or cooperation with the insidious Putin is not out of the question?
That said, Kissinger and Churchill?
Henry Kissinger talked about the fact that the water is changing over time, so different and context — from Peter the Great to Putin, but the rhythm remained the same. And Churchill said that the Russians will try to open all doors by any means, and then politely invite the owners of this room for the feast.
It should be clarified that with the exception of the Baltic coast occupied by Peter I in the XVIII century, Russia was limited by its land borders, and did not look at the sea most part of their history. In the vicinity of “big water” was only on the North is the Arctic ocean, and Eastern Pacific ocean. Most of the time they are covered with ice. The South side has closed the Caspian sea, and Black sea is more like a bottle with a narrow neck, which is hostage to the Straits of the Bosporus and the Dardanelles, that is the heritage of the Ottoman Empire. In this regard, it’s no wonder Moscow’s attempts to regain the Crimea.
Despite all the technological breakthroughs and the development of the Russian army, a factor of the Turkish Straits is still an important factor for the Russian Navy.
The main failure
The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 was a bigger failure than the Crimean war. Analysts focus on the fact that the collapse of the Union was lost many territories (they became independent States). But Russia also lost a lot of waterways and ports, which had a negative impact on the health of its fleet.
However, Hafez Assad, father of Bashar, signed an agreement that allowed Moscow to use Tartus as a center of logistics of the small vessels of the black sea fleet in exchange for the delivery of modern weapons.
In 2005, Bashar was able to write off three-quarters of the Syrian debt to Russia in exchange for the right to host more Russian ships at the base in Tartus then, as Russia had lost the “cold ports” in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.
However, the loss of the Odessa commercial port and the military port in Sevastopol in the warm Black sea, which had been Russian for over two centuries, has proved challenging. Renting a base in Sevastopol, as well as the two Chechen wars have led to economic collapse. Then in 2004 came the revolution in Ukraine and Georgia, after which these countries ‘ relations with Russia deteriorated significantly. And the new Ukraine appealed to Russia with a request to leave Sevastopol before the end of 2017.
The grandeur of Catherine
The greatness of Catherine II impresses Putin. No one in Russia wants to ensure that NATO ships is located on the Russian coast. Putin asked: where will leave the Russian Navy after the loss of Sevastopol, as Novorossiysk on the Black sea was conceived primarily as a new trading port.
But back to the main issue: why are the Syrians signed an agreement with the Russian? When Hafez al-Assad allowed Moscow to use the base in Tartus for maintenance of ships of the black sea fleet (1970), two years after that, Hafez under the supervision of Russian military specialists together with the Egyptians participated in the preparation of attacks on Israel, a US ally.
Services
Here we must note an important point: the expulsion of Anwar Sadat (President of Egypt) of Soviet specialists in mid-1972 because of Moscow’s refusal to supply arms necessary to confront the Israel was a kind of cunning, the first step to the October war. It is considered the only Arab-Israeli war, which was won by the Arabs, while Israel has maintained its reputation as the “undefeated” state. At the same time, Bashar al-Assad after a visit to Moscow in 2005 on the contrary sought to restore military-technical cooperation with Russia, suspended after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
The history of Tartus
In September 2008, after the Russian operation in Georgia were destroyed when the Georgian Navy, Moscow turned its gaze to the Tartus. The amount of the signed contract to use this database amounted to 19.4 billion dollars. After the signing there were deployed missiles, ships and built new barracks. Everything changed after the war with Georgia: what to do this was impossible, now became a reality.
The Role Of The Crimea
After creating a base in Tartus and events in Georgia, conditions were created for non-interference of Washington in the incident in Crimea. Later it became to refer to the Russian intervention in Syria. I understand why it angered the Americans: Syria is one of the main energy centers in the middle East, and Tartus could become the crossroads of major oil and gas pipes.
Bashar speculates solution
In support of Bashar al-Assad, Putin gained control not only over the pipeline passing through the territory of Syria, but also over the vast gas storage facilities. Recall that about 70% of Russia’s revenues accounted for by oil and gas industry. But the pipe passing through the territory of Georgia, Azerbaijan and Ukraine, now outside the influence of Moscow. Bashar is ready to take unilateral decision on the pipeline — and that’s another reason why Putin supports it.
Putin acts in the interests of Bashar
Thanks to a strong relationship, built by Putin and Bashar, the Russian leadership was able in 2013 to persuade Barack Obama not to launch a military operation in Syria to prevent the repetition of the Libyan scenario in Syria. Seeing as NATO bombed Libya, Moscow has consistently rejected any military solution against Assad. In August 2013, it has been proven that the regime is using chemical weapons against civilians that led to the death of 1300 civilians. It was clear that Bashar crossed a red line, and Washington announced the finding of its four destroyers near the Syrian coast. Putin, however, insisted on the removal of all chemical weapons from Assad. Putin went further and accused the Syrian opposition of using chemical weapons. He thereby wanted to emphasize the value of Alliance with Bashar and to dot the “i”.
Rent Tartus for 50 years
Until now, the Russian President focused on the rental Tartus and prevent regime change in Syria according to the Libyan scenario. According to experts, the Russian Navy will not be able to resist American forces in the Mediterranean.
However, Putin is betting on fear of Obama to be involved in an open confrontation with Russia. The mobilization of Russian armed forces and their cooperation with the Iranian revolutionary militia leads US to disastrous results in Syria.
If us forces attack Syria, Putin will bring his troops to the Baltic States, claiming that half of the population of Latvia and Estonia will meet the Russian soldiers with flowers.
Obama: the insistence on inaction
A referendum on the return of Crimea to Russia is understandable. Support of Abkhazia and South Ossetia is also clear — more than 60% speak Russian language. But when Putin decided to invade Syria and sent thousands of soldiers, he had challenged Obama. Russia has already spent about $ 20 million for the development of the base in Tartus, and millions Hamim – all this suggests that Moscow has no plans to quickly withdraw from Syria.
With Hafez
Tartus was a Russian interesting since the rule of Hafez al-Assad, and then interest waned in connection with the collapse of the Soviet Union.
It appears that Putin recently re-realized the importance of ports, especially in light of the growing presence of NATO on the Russian border and attempts to rebuild the entire system of international relations. But let’s be honest. Putin and his destructive policies aimed at supporting the dictatorship of Bashar al-Assad in the ongoing in 2011, the war cannot be stopped.
