Choose Assad or
Islamic State: Putin's Full Court Press (Observador, Portugal)
"Taking
account of the growing problem of refugees in Europe and the forward march and
barbarity of armed groups allied with Islamic State in Syria and Iraq, Moscow
is boosting its military support for the Assad regime to compel the West to
make a choice: either accept the continuation of Assad in power and allow a
broad coalition of political and military forces against the IS radicals to
coalesce thereby leaving resolution of the leadership problem in Damascus for
after victory over the jihadists, or we will continue to abet the deterioration
of the Middle East situation - with all the dire consequences which may
ensue."
Over the last few days, news has spread that Russia is
sending weapons and troops to support the regime of Syrian President Bashar
Assad. While Moscow isn't hiding the fact that it hasn't stopped supplying arms
to Damascus, it continues to deny the involvement of its troops in fighting the
Syrian opposition and the Islamic State.
President Putin himself declared that in compliance with
agreements signed between five and seven years ago his country continues to
supply arms to the government in Damascus. However, with regard to the
participation of Russian troops in combat, the Russian Defense Ministry
recognizes only sending technicians and instructors to teach soldiers of the
Assad regime how to handle Russian-made arms.
Moscow has a naval base in the Syrian port of Tartus and,
according to some reports, it is building a second military base in the port
city of Latakia, but the Russians refuse to confirm
it.
One thing is certain: the Kremlin has strong reasons to
carry out this type of policy. Syria is the only strategic platform Russia has
in the Middle East and Moscow does not intend to lose it. In addition, Russia
fears the emergence of radical Islamist groups in its territory and the
neighboring countries of former-Soviet central Asia. For example, in
Tajikistan, a country that borders Afghanistan, there are now clashes between
government and armed opposition groups – a potential open door for the Islamic
State in a region which is strategic not only for Russia, but for China and the
United States as well.
Washington urges Moscow to be engage more actively in the
fight against Islamic radicals. "We would welcome more active
participation from Russia," declared Mark Toner, a U.S. State Department
representative at the start of September.
Moscow says it isn't opposed to the idea, but insists on one
fundamental condition.
The United States and its Arab allies continue to make a
priority of overthrowing the regime of Bashar Assad, limiting themselves to
strikes against areas controlled by the Islamic State - a tactic that hasn't
brought the desired effect. Russia, for its part, has a reversed order of
priorities.
Posted By Worldmeets.US
Taking account of the growing problem of refugees in Europe and
the forward march and barbarity of armed groups allied with Islamic State in
Syria and Iraq, Moscow is boosting its military support for the Assad regime to
compel the West to make a choice: either accept the continuation of Assad in
power and allow a broad coalition of all political and military forces against
the IS radicals to coalesce thereby leaving resolution of the leadership
problem in Damascus for after victory over the jihadists, or we will continue
to abet the deterioration of the Middle East situation - with all the dire
consequences which may ensue.
He rides in an open car amid hundreds of thousands of people and abhors being separated from his flock. Imagine the...
Washington's fears of a strengthening of Russian influence
in the region are overblown - and the situation continues to degrade. As for
the European Union - one of the injured parties in this conflict because of the
rising time of war refugees - it should not limit itself to receiving people.
It should actively participate in resolving the conflicts in Syria and Iraq as
only a stabilization of those countries will restrain the chaotic flow of
migrants. Meanwhile, E.U. member countries have shown one more that they are
incapable of reaching an agreement even in critical situations like this.
In the latest example, Bulgaria decided to close its
airspace to Russian aircraft headed to Damascus and demand a cargo inspection,
but Athens offered to open the corridor. Actions like this are yet another
dangerous hole in the already battered hull of the "European caravel."
Despite all the differences between Russia on the one hand,
and the United States and E.U. on the other, this seems to be a case in which
the principle to be follow is, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."
