Dropping Assad or not is not the point. Russia is upholding its role in the world and some principles of mutual relations. The biggest risk for Russia is that the growing influence of all kinds of Islamic forces in the Middle East may whip up enthusiasm for Islamic extremists in Russia’s North Caucasus. Hostile relations with Riyadh and Doha are exacerbating this risk.
ValdaiClub.com interview with Fyodor Lukyanov, Editor–in–Chief of Russia in Global Affairs magazine, member of the Valdai Discussion Club.
Not long ago you wrote that Russia’s policy towards Syria is largely prompted by considerations of prestige. Could you explain in more detail whether Russia has scored any points by actively opposing interference in Syrian affairs?
No doubt, Russia has increased its significance and showed everyone that no major international crisis can be resolved without its participation. Moreover, it was important for Russia to show that the Libyan case, when Moscow did not veto the resolution that led to foreign interference, was a fluke rather than a change in conceptual approach. In this sense, Russia has achieved success. Of course, Russia’s crowning achievement would be to broker a gradual transition of power in Syria, with due account of the interests of all sides. But this is more than Moscow can do.
The fighting has reached Damascus. Bashar Assad is losing control over more and more portions of Syrian territory. Is the regime nearing its end? Is its downfall inevitable?
I think Assad won’t be allowed to remain in power – the outside pressure is too strong and the forces that want him out are too powerful. He missed his chance to step down without a problem. Now he will have to stay until the tragic end, or flee and lose both power and respect. I think if official Damascus had behaved differently, it could have avoided such an end but now it is too late. However, it is difficult to predict how long Assad will last – this will depend on the intensity of foreign interference.
Recently Moscow and Beijing again blocked a UN resolution on Syria. In response, the Americans warned that Moscow could be excluded from Syria after what they consider Assad’s inevitable departure. Russia has already proved its influence in the region. Further opposition to the West and the Gulf monarchies is probably pointless and even counterproductive. Isn’t it time for Russia to drop Assad so as to maintain at least some influence in Syria?
Russia is a global rather than regional player. Dropping Assad or not is not the point. Russia is upholding its role in the world and some principles of mutual relations. As cynical as it sounds, the specific circumstances are not important. There isn’t much sense in supporting Assad, but I doubt that we will get anything by dropping him. Russia is already an unfriendly force in the eyes of the potential new authorities. It won’t be able to preserve its positions even on a smaller scale. The only thing that is possible is that the new authorities will realize that they need technical help in repairing or upgrading military equipment, as is now happening in Libya.
Relations with the Gulf countries are bad, but if Russia switches sides in the confrontation, nothing will change, and it will lose even more respect. At least Russia evokes interest and its significance is acknowledged – with irritation, but still. Otherwise, there will be absolutely nothing.
Is a peaceful transfer of power possible now, with Islamists joining the Syrian elites? Can Russia facilitate Assad’s departure to maintain its influence in the region and good relations with the West? Do we need influence in Syria at all? Or was upholding the primacy of international law the sole purpose of the international confrontation surrounding Damascus?
The purpose of the confrontation was to uphold the primacy of certain principles that can be called international law, although in reality these are just formal and informal rules of relations between different states – great powers and not-so-great powers. Whether it is possible to preserve these principles in the world is a separate matter. I’m not sure if this is possible, but this is what Russia is hoping for. As for influence in Syria, yes, we need to maintain it but not at any cost. Russia could afford to leave the Middle East. This will be insulting but not fatal. We don’t have a stake in remaining there. The United States, for one, cannot afford to leave the Middle East because it claims world leadership.
Qatar and Saudi Arabia are leading the Arab world. The recent dispute between Moscow and Riyadh shows that regional powers no longer respect Russia’s status as a great power. What are the implications for global politics of violations of international law and a change in the balance of power in the Arab world? Could they deal a blow to Russia’s influence, say, in Central Asia?
The biggest risk for Russia is that the growing influence of all kinds of Islamic forces in the Middle East may whip up enthusiasm for Islamic extremists in Russia’s North Caucasus. Hostile relations with Riyadh and Doha are exacerbating this risk. As for a change in the balance of power in the Middle East, this process has just started, its end is not clear and it is pointless to predict anything now. What is clear is that the countries that are trying hard to let other states absorb the energy of change are unlikely to avoid the impact of change in their own countries. It will probably come a bit later but there is no avoiding it.
Views expressed are of individual Members and Contributors, rather than the Club's, unless explicitly stated otherwise.