Russia falls victim to its own success in Syria

Not hard to guess the Kremlin’s position regarding the strike by the United States on the Syrian air base. For Russia, it became obvious that trump follows the same path as the previous administration. The US is doing, using the concept of human rights only as a pretext to circumvent the United Nations and to interfere directly in the Affairs of sovereign, according to the Russian States and wreak havoc in them. Moreover, it was made in a country where Russia has a large military presence.

Maria Zakharova, press Secretary of the Ministry of foreign Affairs of Russia complained about the lack of administration trump the desire to establish who is behind gas attacks with sarin. It also accused the United States that now they are attacking a country which has always fought against “international terrorism” in order to “prove themselves”. The Ministry of defense of Russia, in turn, announced that a Memorandum of understanding between Moscow and Washington on Syria at the present time was controversial.

Probably, this is not a real fight. Rather, it is sluggish repetition of another confrontation between Washington and Moscow for what is left of Syria. Despite the protests, the Russian defense Ministry moved out of the way, after the Pentagon used internal channels of communication between Russia and America to inform Moscow about the attack. The day before the attack, States the official press Secretary of the President of Russia Vladimir Putin hinted that Moscow was tired of the riots of the Syrian government. But before you say anything, require a full investigation of any duration which will be required on the issue of chemical attacks.

Even the defense of Assad by Moscow this time seems weak. Russia claims that Assad’s forces did not bomb people using sarin gas, and bombed a warehouse belonging to the rebels on the territory of which just kept the gas. While in August 2013 (the chemical attack in ghouta — approx. TRANS.), Moscow claimed that the operation was carried out by the rebels to draw the United States to fight on their side.

Where did the difference between these two positions? Julia Joffe in his report in the edition of the Atlantic writes that three and a half years ago, Moscow made a brilliant suggestion to enable all parties to save face: she demanded that Assad give chemical weapons to the international coalition. Thus, Obama had to do what he hated — to intervene in a messy civil war. And he was content to dispose of Assad’s chemical weapons. The Syrian President managed to avoid a collision with the American air force and used their own to continue to kill civilians by any conceivable means.

The most important thing is that Russia believes that this transaction enabled it to present itself on the world stage as a Mature and responsible international player, who is in no hurry to pull the trigger, like the United States, and trying to reach civilized solutions to complex problems.

However, Putin drew his red lines over the lines of Obama. In fact, Putin gave Assad permission for the destruction of his people by any means possible, with the exception of chemical weapons. Three years later, Assad is clearly emboldened from Russian military support and diplomatic cover-especially after regaining control over Aleppo and other areas. If Assad could bombard the convoys of aid, forced to give up the starving city, to use torture and to conduct extensive undermining, and even use chlorine, which have not reached agreement in 2013, then why doesn’t he have the right to use a little sarin gas, which it hid from international bodies, being able to buy it abroad, or to resume its production?

Now Russia has few options to save face. After all of these efforts, the use of the last time sarin gas has reduced these efforts to naught. At the same time, Russia cannot allow Washington to ignore the opinion of Putin and the Russian army, and allow to unilaterally violate the idea of national sovereignty, for which Russia spent a lot of time, money and blood in defence of this idea in Syria.

Now Moscow strongly condemned the American attack, exactly to the extent that was enough to maintain his position as protector of the Security Council and international law, as well as a large international military force. But at the same time to Express condemnation should be careful not to justify the killing of children by gas attacks, and most importantly, to prevent violations of international law that prohibit the use of chemical weapons, the adoption of which Russia itself contributed in 2013.

The problem is that all of this was expected. Russia helped President Obama to postpone the problem of chemical weapons and at the same time increased the power of Assad, bringing the situation to the point when it will not pardon the international community that Moscow itself has stirred up three years ago.

Perhaps this lesson will be useful to those who consider Putin a villain, genius tricks, which constantly encircles the United States in Syria around your finger. Putin, of course, a genius manipulator, but time doesn’t always work in his favor.

In other words, when you decided to become someone guarantor, then one day you will have to pay its bills.