Tweet
Today's Zaman, Turkey
June 15 2012
The battle for Syria
by Robert Olson*
The US media, which is so intent on noting every attack and massacre
in the civil war raging between the al-Assad regime and its opposition
in Syria, in fact provides readers with scant information enabling
them to understand what is globally at stake in the war.
While there are many consequences of a regime change in Syria, for
Syrians as well as the other countries and people in the Middle East,
it is vital that readers also be aware of the geopolitical challenges
being mounted in the region.
Unlike the revolutions in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya (I will not discuss
the so far unsuccessful ones in Bahrain, Oman and Yemen), the
revolution and civil war in Syria has vital geostrategic and
geopolitical import for the major global powers -- the US, the EU and
NATO -- and their major challengers Russia, China and Iran.
The first two of the latter group are determined that Syria's fate
will not be the same as that of Tunisia, Egypt or Libya. Syria is the
most important country in the Middle East for the desired projection
of geostrategic power by Russia and China onto the eastern
Mediterranean. It allows China to demonstrate that it is a major power
not only in East Asia but in Southwest Asia. Furthermore, it allows
Beijing to demonstrate its support of Iran's projection of power onto
Syria, Lebanon and the Palestinians. Iran also imports more weapons
systems from China than any other country in the world, providing
Beijing with a potentially strong presence in the Persian Gulf region.
Russia also wants to demonstrate that it will not easily tolerate its
marginalization by the UN, the US, the EU and NATO -- a result of
NATO's war against the Khadafy regime. Moscow also has geostrategic
interests in Syria. Russia's large naval base at Tartus is its only
naval base in the Mediterranean and is vital for its naval and
submarine activities in the Mediterranean Sea. This naval base has
become even more vital with the discovery of gas and oil off the coast
of Israel. It is estimated that these reserves could make Israel one
of the top ten gas producing countries in the world within ten years.
More gas and oil fields have been discovered on Cyprus and Turkey has
begun drilling on its southern coast. Moscow would like a stable and
permanent base from which to monitor these emerging energy sources.
Russia also wants to send a strong message to the US and NATO that it
is extremely unhappy with NATO's decision, driven by the US, to build
a ballistic and nuclear armed missile shield in eastern European
countries directed at Russian sites. In addition, Moscow is concerned
that the demise of the al-Assad regime will further strengthen
Turkey's position in the eastern Mediterranean especially in Syria,
the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) in Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan and the
Palestinians, making Turkey, along with Israel, the two strongest
countries in the eastern Mediterranean. Moscow is concerned that if
the above scenario occurs, Turkey would be in a better position to
challenge Russia more strongly in the Caucasus, long dominated by
Russia especially in Georgia and Azerbaijan. Ankara might potentially
support an Azerbaijani military attack on Armenia to regain
approximately 20 percent of territory that it lost to Armenia in wars
in the `90s. Azerbaijan, flush with billions of dollars in oil and gas
revenue, is primed for war against Armenia which is allied with Russia
-- the traditional protector of Christians against warring Muslims.
Azerbaijan and Turkey are two Turkic countries are closely connected
by the motto, `Two nations but one people.' Thus, in terms of global
geostrategic interests, Syria is as vital for Moscow as the other
Caucasus countries. It should also be noted that Iran, although a
country in which a Muslim clergy provides much of the leadership, is a
strong supporter of Armenia, unlike Turkey, who the West charges with
committing genocide against the Armenians in 1915.
In addition, if the al-Assad regime were to fall in the next six
months, which seems likely, and the Syrian opposition continues to
receive support from the `Friends of Syria,' who are also the enemies
of Iran, the situation has a possibility of creating more challenges
to the US, the EU and NATO from Russia and China who also oppose
current UN, US, EU and NATO policies towards Iran.
*Robert Olson is a Middle East analyst based in Lexington, Kentucky.
June 15 2012
The battle for Syria
by Robert Olson*
The US media, which is so intent on noting every attack and massacre
in the civil war raging between the al-Assad regime and its opposition
in Syria, in fact provides readers with scant information enabling
them to understand what is globally at stake in the war.
While there are many consequences of a regime change in Syria, for
Syrians as well as the other countries and people in the Middle East,
it is vital that readers also be aware of the geopolitical challenges
being mounted in the region.
Unlike the revolutions in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya (I will not discuss
the so far unsuccessful ones in Bahrain, Oman and Yemen), the
revolution and civil war in Syria has vital geostrategic and
geopolitical import for the major global powers -- the US, the EU and
NATO -- and their major challengers Russia, China and Iran.
The first two of the latter group are determined that Syria's fate
will not be the same as that of Tunisia, Egypt or Libya. Syria is the
most important country in the Middle East for the desired projection
of geostrategic power by Russia and China onto the eastern
Mediterranean. It allows China to demonstrate that it is a major power
not only in East Asia but in Southwest Asia. Furthermore, it allows
Beijing to demonstrate its support of Iran's projection of power onto
Syria, Lebanon and the Palestinians. Iran also imports more weapons
systems from China than any other country in the world, providing
Beijing with a potentially strong presence in the Persian Gulf region.
Russia also wants to demonstrate that it will not easily tolerate its
marginalization by the UN, the US, the EU and NATO -- a result of
NATO's war against the Khadafy regime. Moscow also has geostrategic
interests in Syria. Russia's large naval base at Tartus is its only
naval base in the Mediterranean and is vital for its naval and
submarine activities in the Mediterranean Sea. This naval base has
become even more vital with the discovery of gas and oil off the coast
of Israel. It is estimated that these reserves could make Israel one
of the top ten gas producing countries in the world within ten years.
More gas and oil fields have been discovered on Cyprus and Turkey has
begun drilling on its southern coast. Moscow would like a stable and
permanent base from which to monitor these emerging energy sources.
Russia also wants to send a strong message to the US and NATO that it
is extremely unhappy with NATO's decision, driven by the US, to build
a ballistic and nuclear armed missile shield in eastern European
countries directed at Russian sites. In addition, Moscow is concerned
that the demise of the al-Assad regime will further strengthen
Turkey's position in the eastern Mediterranean especially in Syria,
the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) in Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan and the
Palestinians, making Turkey, along with Israel, the two strongest
countries in the eastern Mediterranean. Moscow is concerned that if
the above scenario occurs, Turkey would be in a better position to
challenge Russia more strongly in the Caucasus, long dominated by
Russia especially in Georgia and Azerbaijan. Ankara might potentially
support an Azerbaijani military attack on Armenia to regain
approximately 20 percent of territory that it lost to Armenia in wars
in the `90s. Azerbaijan, flush with billions of dollars in oil and gas
revenue, is primed for war against Armenia which is allied with Russia
-- the traditional protector of Christians against warring Muslims.
Azerbaijan and Turkey are two Turkic countries are closely connected
by the motto, `Two nations but one people.' Thus, in terms of global
geostrategic interests, Syria is as vital for Moscow as the other
Caucasus countries. It should also be noted that Iran, although a
country in which a Muslim clergy provides much of the leadership, is a
strong supporter of Armenia, unlike Turkey, who the West charges with
committing genocide against the Armenians in 1915.
In addition, if the al-Assad regime were to fall in the next six
months, which seems likely, and the Syrian opposition continues to
receive support from the `Friends of Syria,' who are also the enemies
of Iran, the situation has a possibility of creating more challenges
to the US, the EU and NATO from Russia and China who also oppose
current UN, US, EU and NATO policies towards Iran.
*Robert Olson is a Middle East analyst based in Lexington, Kentucky.