Moscow and Damascus are using similar political tactics, which boil down to one step forward, three steps back. Russia’s resolute defense of the Assad regime appeared to have come to an abrupt end, when it backed the UN-Arab League peace mission of Kofi Annan and the subsequent six-point peace plan.
At the time, the then Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev offered Annan any help the former UN secretary-general needed and said that his mission might be the last chance to avoid a “prolonged and bloody civil war.”
China which had been seen clearly distancing itself from Assad, also backed the Annan mission and peace deal to send in UN monitors. It seemed at last that with Russia’s recognition of the enormities that were being committed by Syrian government against its own people, the diplomatic ground beneath Assad’s feet was finally breaking up.
However in its readiness to welcome Moscow’s apparent change of heart, the international community overlooked the fact that for the Russians, under the dominance of Vladimir Putin, their policy in Syria is a pure power play and is not in the slightest bit driven by human rights concerns.
Syria is Russia’s last ally in the Arab world and it is home to Russia’s only two naval bases in the West, which are clear of Turkey’s narrow Bosphorus and Dardanelles passages, which in time of conflict or even confrontation, might be closed, thus walling up Moscow’s Black Sea fleet.
So even as the Assad regime continues to dishonor the commitments it made when it accepted the UN-Arab peace plan, and more evidence emerges, confirmed this time by UN monitors, of the brutal execution of hand-cuffed civilians, almost certainly perpetrated by Syrian security forces or paramilitary thugs, Russia has switched back to blocking mode.
The Kremlin is going to considerable lengths to paint the majority of the international community in the wrong. It was an error, said the Russians this week, for the coordinated expulsion of Syrian diplomats from their country’s missions around the world. How can a diplomatic solution be found, they asked, if there are no longer any diplomats with whom to negotiate ? This question is specious, because in every country where its officials have been thrown out, Syria still has other diplomats. And besides, if ever Assad were ever serious about negotiations, it would be no problem to jet in the right officials from Damascus.
Russia also maintains that it is concerned at the consequences of international military intervention. It cites the way that NATO finessed its air operations to protect Libyan civilians into an outright and devastating assault on the Qaddafi regime’s military machine. Yet Moscow must be perfectly aware that there is neither the political appetite for another NATO-style operation, not least because the challenges in Syria are very much more complex than those of Libya.
Moscow is perfectly capable of voting for a tightly-framed UN Security Council resolution that does not permit the mission creep seen in Libya or indeed before the US-led invasion of Iraq. The fact that it chooses not to, means that it is unbothered that Syria is tearing itself apart with maybe more than 15,000 people now dead. For its own deeply unworthy purposes, it is prepared to prop up a blood-thirsty dictator who has no interest in negotiations but is intent upon slaughtering his rebellious people back into line.
Maybe the time is coming when the international community should start thinking about playing hardball with Moscow. If Russia cannot behave as a responsible international citizen, then perhaps it should be warned of sanctions and isolation that could be mounted against it.
President Putin cannot press on cynically defending the indefensible without expecting to generate some sort of repercussion from a world that is appalled and revolted by the bloody butchery that continues to take place in Syria.
