Cost of Intervention in Syria Rises

The Russian First Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov’s statement today re-affirmed Moscow’s rejection of arms embargo against Syria. It comes on a day EU FMs met in Brussels and tightened the sanctions against that country. But what makes the Syrian situation rather interesting is that Moscow also let it be known today that it is arming Syria to defend itself. There were reports last week that Russia is supplying Syria with S-300 missiles.

Now, Interfax reported today that Russia has supplied Syria with Bastion mobile coastal missile systems with supersonic anti-ship Yakhont cruise missiles as part of an arms deal – about which there were US and Israeli objections previously. A Russian naval battle group is also reaching Syria shortly with military advisors. Interestingly, the Interfax report appears on the same day that Russian DFM Sergey Ryabkov met Israeli FM Avigdor Lieberman and the head of Israeli National Security Council Yaakov Amidror in Tel Aviv.

The Yakhont cruise missile significantly puts up the cost of intervention in Syria for Turkey and its western allies. Moscow has done well to anticipate the likely repetition of the western plan to first incrementally destabilise and degrade an interntionally-recognised regime and then ‘delegitimise’ it in order to pave the way for armed intervention and ‘regime change’. This was what happened in Iraq and recently in Libya.

So, if the Turks and the French really want to go for Syria, let them also take with them a few additional coffins to bring back the corpses of their brave warriors. Whether the Russia ploy works as a ‘disincentive’ on the dogs of war, time only will tell. But it may just about make them think twice, at least. And maybe something good may come out of it, after all, if the Turks and the western powers change their cussedness and would permit the Syrian opposition to enter into a national dialogue with the government in Damascus.

In Turkey, at least, there is a sharp division of opinion about Syria. The main opposition party CHP strongly questions the interventionist policy of the government. The CHP is a staunchly secularist party and it is wary of the present government abandoning Kemal Ataturk’s dictum that Turkey shouldn’t get entangled with the Muslim Middle East. CHP is rooted in the Kemalist principles of Turkish nationalism. But then, its leadership also has no ‘entanglement’ with the unaccounted ‘green money’, which flows into Turkey from the Persian Gulf sheikhs.

Source: Indian Punchline

4 Comments

  1. Yeah well, personally and ‘off the top’ I think Russia is setting up Syria for a larger intervention by arming them.

    Then Russia will abstain from the security council vote on intervention.

    After all, the Russians are supplying a land route into Afghanistan for the NATO invaders in Afghanistan.

    It’s worthwhile to ask whether or not the US and Russia are in alliance now, with the ‘boogieman’, energy hungry (to make all the crap western consumers want) China in their sights, and Syria is only so much good cop/bad cop activity testing the alliance..

  2. If Russia and China, want to save themselves from the wrath of the “mongol” hordes sweeping from the west to conquer the world then they best save Syria and Iran and their Hezbollah allies. If they don’t, they will certainly be either swallowed up or become their financial and cultural slaves.

    It seems that the Biblical and Muslim prophesies are coming true. How far is Armageddon? Maybe, 10 years. Will this civilization survive?

  3. @RazerRay
    Too sophisticated logic. The message we are sending to the West is ‘Do Not Mess With Syria.’ They are protected. Even if we pass a resolution on Syria, the latter would have an absolutely different wording compared to notorious 1973. No no-fly zone. No condemnation. Balanced call for national reconciliation in the framework of the Council created by President Al-Assad.

    @Gulam
    We know that. We will stand this pressure. But we would welcome the support and non-indifference of awaken mankind.

  4. If Russia intends to secure its interests particularly in view of Washington’s intent to establish military bases around Russia and China, [what smacks of old cold war policy of encircling the opponents of US in the global context], then it has to obstruct US intentions in the Mideast. The eagle’s beak though has fairly been blunted [due to its expansionist policies at the expense of US tax payers’ money], yet by its expansionism Uncle Sam wants to re-establish its glamour of yesteryears. Its in the interest of Russia, China and all other freedom loving nations to join their efforts in resisting America’s expansionism and help out Syria and Iran which will be the first step in that direction. Mustering benefits from Washington for certain timely reasons may not be in the long term interest of Russia.

    The autocratic regime that we have in Syria though leaves a lot of room for President Assad to see how long can he pull on by denying his people the right to choose a government of their liking, but in spite of that, this is none of America’s business to decide who will govern whom.

    The US administrations have become accustomed to lecture countries of the world on democracy, human rights, free and fair elections but at the same time they prop up dictatorial regimes if such regimes serve as her lackeys. This duplicity in US policy needs to be exposed and the first step would be to thwart the intended western aggression upon Syria which later could be expanded to Iran and may be even to Pakistan.

    Nayyar Hashmey
    http://wondersofpakisan.wordpress.com

Leave a Reply