Putin's Strategic Shift: Why He Let Assad's Regime Waver Amid New Alliances in the Middle East

In July, Russian President Vladimir Putin held a meeting with Syria's former leader Bashar al-Assad at the Kremlin, discussing key bilateral relations and regional stability amid ongoing challenges in Syria.

P24 News Media

December 15, 2024

1 minute

Putin's Strategic Shift: Why He Let Assad's Regime Waver Amid New Alliances in the Middle East

India

In a significant development just hours prior to the collapse of Damascus, key representatives from Russia, Iran, and Türkiye convened at the Doha Forum. The main focus of their discussion was the imminent downfall of the Syrian regime under Bashar al-Assad. This meeting reflected their collective concern over whether the Assad administration could be rescued from its dire situation.

The three nations released a statement emphasizing the need to uphold Syria's territorial integrity while advocating for negotiations between the rebel faction Hayʼat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) and the Assad government. However, it appeared that by this stage, the diplomats were acutely aware of the gravity of the situation and the likelihood of an irreversible collapse.

In an interview with Al Jazeera, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov exhibited visible frustration as he faced probing questions regarding the escalating crisis. “If you expect me to declare that we have lost in Syria, that we are desperate... then let’s continue this conversation,” Lavrov remarked. He clarified, “We are focused on preventing terrorists from gaining the upper hand, even if they claim to have distanced themselves from terrorism.” Shortly thereafter, Damascus succumbed to rebel forces.

While it's undeniable that the fall of the Assad regime dealt a substantial blow to Vladimir Putin's influence in the Middle East, it is equally apparent that Russia was cautious about becoming entangled in another protracted conflict. Additionally, Russia's strategic relationships with Türkiye and various Arab Gulf nations were likely factors in its reluctance to fully support a faltering regime.

In the days leading to the collapse, Russia conducted airstrikes against Syrian rebels to bolster the Assad regime’s forces, yet these efforts fell short of adequately addressing the advancing rebel movements towards Damascus. Assad's troops displayed minimal resistance, choosing to abandon their positions rather than fight.

It is notable that Putin had the option of deploying additional military resources, yet he refrained from doing so. Reports from ABC News VERIFY indicated that Russia had actually repositioned significant military assets away from their locations in Syria in the preceding weeks.

The question arises: did Russia anticipate the inevitable disintegration of the Assad regime? Reports suggest that both the Kremlin and its Iranian allies comprehended that Assad's regime was nearing its end. “They were acutely aware that Assad was finished,” comments Julien Barnes-Dacy, director of the Middle East and North Africa program at the European Council on Foreign Relations. He adds that the Russians and Iranians lacked either the resources or the desire to re-engage militarily on Assad’s behalf. Ultimately, it seemed that both nations opted to minimize their losses instead of facing the burden of continued support for the beleaguered regime.

In an unexpected turn, it appears that Putin may have brokered a tacit understanding with HTS forces to facilitate a swift ousting of the Assad regime, provided that Russia could retain its strategically critical military installations in Syria. “I suspect they reached a deal,” Barnes-Dacy asserts. “They advised Assad to step down, which likely paved the way for a smoother transition than many anticipated, and nations like Türkiye and Arab states appear to welcome this outcome.”

With the regime of President Bashar al-Assad crumbling, pressing questions emerge regarding the future of Syria and the representation of its people. In the wake of this upheaval, the Kremlin indicated its intention to enter negotiations with the new governing authorities in Syria regarding the future presence of Russian military forces.

However, challenges remain regarding the sustainability of such agreements. As the rebels advance, they may be inclined to accept any terms that facilitate Assad’s quick removal, raising questions about the long-term viability of any arrangements made. Barnes-Dacy observes that substantial resentment exists towards Russia and Iran within Syria, and it is uncertain whether the incoming leadership will be amenable to permitting a continued military presence from the nation that bombed them.

For Russia, maintaining a foothold, even under strained conditions, is better than losing everything after years of investment. Moscow currently operates two pivotal military bases in Syria: the Khmeimim Air Base and the Tartus naval base, both crucial for its regional military operations. The Tartus base, in particular, affords Russia its only direct access to the Mediterranean, facilitating naval exercises and the docking of warships, even nuclear submarines.

The strategic importance of these installations reinforces the necessity for Russia to maintain a presence in Syria, especially as it navigates the loss of its influence as a power broker in conflicts involving Israel, Iran, and Syria.

In addition, with Hezbollah and Hamas encountering significant setbacks, there are indications that Putin may shift his focus toward other non-state actors aligned with Iran's Axis of Resistance, particularly in North Africa and Yemen, where relationships with groups like the Houthis have been developing.

Despite a convergence of interests, it is crucial to understand that the Houthis are primarily driven by domestic objectives and may be wary of becoming mere instruments of Russian foreign policy. Their aspirations are focused on governing Yemen and asserting control over its resource-rich regions, leading them to navigate their relationship with Russia with caution. In summary, a single meeting at the Doha Forum has heralded a turning point in Putin's longstanding alliance with Assad, compelling Russia to reevaluate its strategies and alliances in a volatile region.