Almost seven years ago, President Vladimir Putin proudly announced the Russian military’s success in combating “terrorists” in Syria during a visit to the airbase supporting Bashar Assad’s regime amid the ongoing civil war. Fast forward to this past weekend, however, and the situation has drastically changed; Assad has fled to Moscow as opposition forces rapidly advance, a development that his primary supporters, Russia and Iran, were unable to counter.
The collapse of Assad’s administration is a stark revelation of the limitations of Russian influence and power on the international stage, particularly affecting its ongoing military operations in Ukraine. An examination of Russia’s engagement in Syria reveals significant implications of Assad’s potential downfall for Moscow.
Historically, the Soviet Union supported Assad’s father, Hafez Assad, for nearly three decades, providing military assistance. Following the unrest in 2011 when protests against Bashar Assad escalated into a civil conflict, Russia remained a crucial ally, offering political backing at the United Nations. When Assad’s grip on power weakened significantly in 2015 after several military setbacks, Russia intervened alongside Iran, launching a military campaign to aid the Syrian government.
In support of Assad, Russia placed warplanes in the Hemeimeem airbase located in Latakia, Syria, effectively launching the “Syrian Express,” an operation that transported a vast amount of military supplies. The air intervention commenced on September 30, 2015, with Russian aircraft maintaining a rigorous flying schedule, which provided valuable combat experience to Russian pilots.
Simultaneously, Moscow enhanced its naval base in Tartus, Russia’s sole outpost outside the former Soviet space. Special operations units were deployed for ground tasks, along with hundreds of military advisors sent to train Syrian forces, aided by mercenaries from the Wagner Group, linked to businessman Yevgeny Prigozhin. This military backing enabled Assad to regain control over a majority of Syria, allowing the Kremlin to emerge as a major Middle Eastern power. Putin’s visit to Hemeimeem on December 11, 2017, followed Russia’s claim of victory against the Islamic State and his own re-election campaign announcement.
Despite these gains, Russia’s attempts to retain Assad’s leadership faltered in the face of political realities. After assisting Assad in regaining much of Syria, Moscow encouraged him towards negotiating with moderate opposition groups. Nonetheless, emboldened by initial victories, Assad was reluctant to consider any compromise, resisting efforts towards national reconciliation. Analysts point out that Russia’s focus on maintaining a fragile status quo has resulted in little more than a lingering and ineffective Assad regime.
The escalating economic crisis, worsened by international sanctions, further destabilized Syria and its military capabilities. The once-dominant Syrian army suffered swift defeats against opposition forces, a situation that both Iran and Russia could not avert, especially as their resources were diverted elsewhere. With Russia largely consumed by the war in Ukraine and Iran hampered by sanctions, neither could fortify Assad’s position adequately.
The collapse of Assad, as characterized by Alexander Dugin, a prominent Kremlin ideologue, represents a significant setback for Russia. The rapid disintegration of a regime supported by immense Russian resources has left many in the Kremlin feeling it is a grave disappointment.
In the wake of Assad’s downfall, concerns arise regarding the future of Russian military assets in Syria, which represent Moscow’s exclusive foothold beyond the former USSR. The number of warplanes at the Hemeimeem airbase has dwindled significantly, though it remains pivotal for logistics. Russian planes routinely use the base as a refueling point for operations extending to Africa, and losing control of this facility would complicate those efforts.
In Tartus, Russian naval forces rely on the base for maintenance and resupply activities in the Mediterranean. Despite the recent opposition offensive, the Russian military continued to conduct drills in the eastern Mediterranean, centering on Tartus.
Even while Putin provided asylum to Assad and his family, efforts have been made to engage with new authorities in Syria to secure the future of Russian bases. Yet, the emergence of opposition symbols in the Syrian Embassy in Moscow signals a shift in dynamics. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov indicated that discussions with the incoming powers regarding military positions would be necessary as the situation evolves.
As preparations unfold for an impending change in U.S. administration, Assad’s fall spells turmoil for Putin, especially with burgeoning tensions surrounding the Ukraine conflict. The loss of Russia’s singular ally in the Middle East has diminished its prestige and may lead to a more challenging negotiation environment regarding Ukraine.
Experts suggest that the Kremlin may need to adapt its strategies to navigate relationships with new Syrian leaders who, for now, seem inclined to avoid conflicts with Moscow. Nevertheless, the fear of appearing weak could push Putin towards a firmer stance on issues related to Ukraine amidst these shifting geopolitical circumstances. The lessons learned from Syria’s instability and the associated costs may influence his willingness to engage in compromise.
In summary, the rapid disintegration of Assad’s regime poses serious questions for Russia’s influence in the region while complicating its existing military obligations in Ukraine and other areas, leaving its future strategies shrouded in uncertainty.
