What would lead Russia's withdrawal from Syria


It’s quite difficult now to imagine how seriously the President of Turkey Recep Erdogan was counting on fulfilling his own requirements when he declared that “Russia should leave Syria”, leaving it “face to face with Assad”. But since these words were voiced, it’s worthwhile, at least in general terms, to try to simulate how the situation in this country would develop if it were left without direct military support from the Russian Federation.


First of all, it’s not necessary to say that in this case Damascus could definitely forget about plans to restore order in Idlib and to master the strategic routes M-4 and M-5 without control over which normal work to restore the country seems extremely problematic . There is no doubt that, relying on the open support of the Turkish army, which in such a situation would immediately increase at times, the anti-government groups entrenched in this region would not only push the SAA back to their previously occupied positions, but would also significantly expand the territory controlled by terrorists.

However, this would surely be only the first act of a new tragedy that would inevitably await Syria. It should not be forgotten that plans to remove Bashar al-Assad from power are not only hatched in Ankara. Washington in this case is an interested party. It would hardly be a question of reviving ISIS (a terrorist organization banned in the Russian Federation) or creating a new similar terrorist structure. The United States is so powerful and, besides, an uncontrolled tool to realize its goals in this region, is simply not needed right now. However, support from them is money, weapons and military equipment, instructors - to various groups of the "moderate opposition" and even more radical structures focused on a change of power in Damascus would immediately flow like a river.

With this development of events, the prospects for the legitimate authority of Syria seem, alas, extremely doubtful. The army is pretty much bled of years of war, industry and infrastructure are destroyed, there are no allies. To those for Damascus today, in addition to Russia, only Iran can be unequivocally ranked. But the coronavirus epidemic raging in this country significantly reduces its ability to provide effective assistance to someone.

In addition, immediately after the hypothetical withdrawal from Syria of the Russian air forces and air defense, Israel would fully activate there, which would make every effort in the struggle to completely oust any Iranian or pro-Iranian formations from there. It is unlikely that we would be talking about full-scale aggression involving the ground forces, however, at least aviation The IDF, no longer fearing our air defense systems and fighters, would have turned Syria into a zone of constant bombardment.

Ultimately, the forces striving to transform Syria into an arena of endless war of all against all, waged on ethnic, religious, political grounds, would follow the path of "pulling" it into many enclaves that are at war with each other. Representatives of these enclaves would wage a constant struggle both with the remnants of the forces of a legitimate government, and among themselves. One could forget about any interests of Russia, its military presence and political influence not only in Syria itself, but also in the entire region of the Middle East once and for all.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

63 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. bessmertniy 13 March 2020 07: 07 New
    • 4
    • 3
    +1
    I think that the most acceptable option for Turkey in a neighboring country is the absorption of Syria. No matter how Erdogan declares that he stands for its integrity. what Another thing is that this option is not satisfactory for either the Syrians or other countries involved in the conflict. negative
    1. Ross xnumx 13 March 2020 07: 49 New
      • 8
      • 2
      +6
      What would lead Russia's withdrawal from Syria

      To the Yugoslav version in the Middle East.
      1. bessmertniy 13 March 2020 08: 05 New
        • 7
        • 5
        +2
        Yugoslavia was divided between the peoples inhabiting it, and here neighbors want to join the section.
        1. Paul Siebert 13 March 2020 09: 18 New
          • 6
          • 1
          +5
          Yugoslavia was divided between the peoples inhabiting it, and here neighbors want to join the section.

          Kosovo is actually controlled by Albania. On its territory is the largest NATO base in Europe.
          And the KFOR forces themselves are not made up of the peoples inhabiting the SFRY ...
        2. Grits 13 March 2020 15: 13 New
          • 1
          • 2
          -1
          Quote: bessmertniy
          and here the neighbors want to join the section.

          And not just the neighbors. Fans of protecting oil would also be happy to bite off a piece of themselves. preferably one where the oil stinks.
      2. knn54 13 March 2020 11: 16 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        It’s better not to think about it ... but to continue to act.
        Libya, Somalia, Sudan is one of the prospects if there would be no assistance to Assad.
    2. Aleksandr1971 14 March 2020 15: 51 New
      • 1
      • 2
      -1
      The accession of Syria is hardly the goal of Erdogan. Here, the hedgehog is clear that if someone else’s cancerous tumor is sewn to his body, the whole body will also become ill. Moreover, the only thing the Turks have in common with the Arabs is religion. Otherwise, they differ significantly. Think for yourself - would it be useful for Russia to annex Syria to itself?
  2. Finches 13 March 2020 07: 08 New
    • 12
    • 20
    -8
    The kids are hanging out in Syria due to the intersection of the strategic interests of large corporations - and not because Russian and Syrian are brothers forever! But we definitely need to be there! Salvage is money for the Kremlin and Sechin, and for the Russian people - a matter of honor!
    1. Gardamir 13 March 2020 07: 38 New
      • 18
      • 12
      +6
      It would be nice to remember about the honor of talking about the Donbass.
      1. Finches 13 March 2020 07: 42 New
        • 7
        • 8
        -1
        I would say about Ukraine! But, people are military, a priori people of honor, unfortunately, are subordinate to people of politics who do not have it!
    2. carstorm 11 13 March 2020 07: 55 New
      • 10
      • 5
      +5
      Wars between states, as well as hostility between people, often begin because of “material gain” or the struggle for resources, the understanding and significance of this resource historically changes, but the essence remains the same. Another set of reasons lies in the imperfection of human nature, in its vices and desires. The interests of the state often depend on the interests of the “powerful people of this world”, and they are people, and nothing human, including negative qualities, is alien to them. And, finally, the third set of reasons lies in ethnic, religious, cultural and mental disagreements between peoples. Simply put, what is good for the Russian is death for the Chinese. So it has developed historically and no “end of history” will help to overcome these contradictions. Attempts to make others look like themselves lead to inevitable wars.
      1. Aleksandr1971 14 March 2020 16: 00 New
        • 0
        • 2
        -2
        And why did you decide that the desire to join other people's resources is a vice? If it is within one society, then the realization of such a desire will turn into a crime. And if it is between nations, then such a desire will lead to the appropriation of the resource more powerful. The whole story is like that. And this is true, because there is no need for weaklings, savages and loafers to sit on resources.
        Imagine that the Dutch and the British, having discovered Australia, would say that let the natives own this land. Or Ermak and the Russian Cossacks would repent of capturing Siberia from the indigenous peoples. So those aspects of a person’s character that are often called imperfect are often the opposite, advantages.
        In Syria, there is a big showdown on the redistribution of local modest resources. Russia does not really need these resources. But Russia, and not only her, is hindered by excessive bloody fuss over this redistribution.
    3. lis-ik 13 March 2020 19: 16 New
      • 3
      • 4
      -1
      Quote: Finches
      The kids are hanging out in Syria due to the intersection of the strategic interests of large corporations - and not because Russian and Syrian are brothers forever! But we definitely need to be there! Salvage is money for the Kremlin and Sechin, and for the Russian people - a matter of honor!

      Unfortunately, many do not want to understand this.
  3. rocket757 13 March 2020 07: 08 New
    • 6
    • 5
    +1
    What would lead Russia's withdrawal from Syria

    Is such an option considered "on top" ???
    So far, there’s nothing to argue about .... if, yes, if only again consider mushrooms ... which are NOT!
    1. rich 14 March 2020 06: 54 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      Naturally considered. And was analyzed yes Like all other options for the development of the situation. It can not be in any other way. Do you really think that the staff are doing something else.
      1. rocket757 14 March 2020 08: 47 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        He didn’t put it right .... staffers consider a lot of things, they have such a job, but the leadership should choose a specific option and start preparing for it (technical, organizational and other events).
        No signs, no hints that they can stop everything and retreat / run away from there ..... I have not heard / not seen.
        Maybe I don’t know, didn’t notice ???
  4. DMB 75 13 March 2020 07: 13 New
    • 11
    • 6
    +5
    Russia's departure would have led to a lot of blood, first of all. Everyone is against everyone and everyone is for himself. If we pulled off the dusty project of the Qatar-Turkey gas pipeline from the shelf, Syria would no longer exist as a state — Americans would tear apart the neighbors as much as they could, they would calmly pump oil, and
    One could forget about any interests of Russia, its military presence and political influence not only in Syria itself, but also in the entire region of the Middle East once and for all.
    1. protoss 13 March 2020 08: 53 New
      • 6
      • 12
      -6
      why don’t you just throw this myth about the pipe out of your dusty brains? Asad has already told you that such a project never happened, and you all had one at a time - Qatar, a gas pipeline, we would have lost the market, and so we would have won, GDP strategist ...
  5. Grandfather Crimea 13 March 2020 07: 34 New
    • 6
    • 3
    +3
    The topic raised is very painful for Syria (first of all), then for the Russian Federation and only then for everyone else. For Syria, finding the forces of the Russian Federation is the preservation of sovereignty. For Russia, it’s honor and preservation of its bases, $ companies are likely to invest in the country's reconstruction process (a deeper entry into this process is possible). Iran and other military units (Lebanese, Afghan) have their own cockroaches in their heads. Not to mention the plans of the neighbors. In addition to the loss of territories and sovereignty, the Turks would have blocked the water artery, this is also not unimportant. Actually, a complete drop would come to the country. But something must happen in Syria (or maybe not?) - there is a prophecy that Syria will fall. Let's wait and see, everything is just around the corner.
  6. Dynamo 13 March 2020 07: 54 New
    • 15
    • 10
    +5
    What would lead Russia's withdrawal from Syria

    All federal channels would have left coverage of only one Ukraine. And at least some kind of diversity is also being said about Syria.
    1. Aleksandr1971 14 March 2020 16: 07 New
      • 0
      • 3
      -3
      Our military needs a training ground to hone our skills. It is important not to be afraid to raise a weapon to another person. Therefore, it is advisable to let all the military personnel through Syria. Designers and manufacturers need to run in weapons. Let Syria better than Donbass
  7. ABM
    ABM 13 March 2020 07: 58 New
    • 17
    • 14
    +3
    "He left the hut, went to fight
    To give the land of the Sunnis to the Shiites "
    Assad’s enemies are only increasing every year, we don’t have time to mow. There is absolutely no benefit to Russia. Mythical gas pipeline from Qatar? When the correspondent asked Assad himself about this, he said that he had not heard anything about it ... And so with all the myths
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. The comment was deleted.
  8. zlobny tatarin 13 March 2020 07: 59 New
    • 5
    • 3
    +2
    If my grandmother had ....., then she would be a grandfather.
    About nothing. Air shake.
  9. Odysseus 13 March 2020 08: 01 New
    • 22
    • 10
    +12
    Let me remind you that in 2014 the car for fooling claimed that the Russian Federation could not directly intervene in the events in the Donbass since "World War 3 would begin." It also states that the Russian Federation simply needs to continue the war in Syria (which is longer for us than the Second World War) and spend people, equipment and money having Turkey (in the control of the north of Syria) and the USA (the east) in the adversaries.
    Moreover, when the civil war was just beginning there (2011) and when there really something could be changed gr. Putin claimed that we have no interests in Syria.
    And despite the fact that in reality Syria has long been divided into zones of occupation. And there is no chance of eliminating these zones.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Tank hard 13 March 2020 12: 20 New
      • 1
      • 3
      -2
      Quote: Odyssey
      (which is longer for us than WWII)

      Odysseus, after all, with Ithaki, what kind of war is there now? wink With grooms?
  10. 7,62h54 13 March 2020 08: 37 New
    • 4
    • 3
    +1
    Retreating is somehow uncomfortable. And the second Afghanistan is not desirable.
  11. Brigadier 13 March 2020 08: 52 New
    • 10
    • 5
    +5
    "Any interests of Russia, its military presence and political influence, not only in Syria itself, but also in the entire region of the Middle East, could be forgotten once and for all. "

    Tex is incomplete!

    Will be full: "About any interests TOPs OF RUSSIA IN THE CHAPTER WITH PUTIN, its military presence and political influence not only in Syria itself, but also in the entire region of the Middle East, could be forgotten once and for all. "

    Now it seems to be written correctly and understandably for everyone.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  12. protoss 13 March 2020 09: 03 New
    • 3
    • 3
    0
    Well, if yes, if only ...
    and if tomorrow Syria fell into the ground (ours managed to evacuate, no one was hurt) and in its place a new bay ash-sham splashes).
    would we care?
  13. Cyrus 13 March 2020 09: 05 New
    • 4
    • 5
    -1
    For Russia, this would be a political catastrophe, not just a withdrawal from the Mediterranean Sea, in the long term it is the loss of all allies and influence in the world with all that it implies.
    1. KARAKURT15 15 March 2020 23: 18 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Does Russia have allies? Can you name at least one?
      1. Cyrus 17 March 2020 11: 02 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Russia does not have allies, just as the USA does not have allies, but they can be allies of anyone, because both of these countries are self-sufficient and do not need anyone's military assistance.
  14. The comment was deleted.
  15. Livonetc 13 March 2020 09: 25 New
    • 1
    • 2
    -1
    Why did they raise such a scenario for discussion?
    Are there any real prerequisites?
  16. nikvic46 13 March 2020 09: 47 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1
    If we are the successors of the USSR, then we must stay. There we are rightfully invited to this country. But there are uninvited guests who behave rudely.
  17. dgonni 13 March 2020 10: 11 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    And what is Israel afraid of our air defense or VKS? On the occasion of the IL-20, something is not noticeable
    1. A. Privalov 13 March 2020 12: 11 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Quote: dgonni
      And what is Israel afraid of our air defense or VKS? On the occasion of the IL-20, something is not noticeable

      Absolutely right! Should be afraid only krivoruky Syrian anti-aircraft gunners. And to all.
  18. ZaharoFF 13 March 2020 10: 20 New
    • 2
    • 3
    -1
    Of course, this would be a disaster, humanitarian, economic, political and any other. For the Syrians, this would be a great personal tragedy.
  19. Tank hard 13 March 2020 12: 12 New
    • 2
    • 4
    -2
    Here, just recently, there was a choral roar of "all-fussers" and "true admirers" of the Russian state that the Krants of Russia are coming, for Turkey will show that the Turks have the army of the wow! Question about this ... What blocked your sultanik straits? Huh? laughing
  20. Just a Traveler 13 March 2020 12: 18 New
    • 4
    • 4
    0
    There are no interests in Russia there and cannot be.
    It is necessary to divide this country and build the life of the peoples living again.
    If members of the same family cannot live together, they need to be resettled in separate apartments.
    1. fif21 13 March 2020 21: 51 New
      • 2
      • 5
      -3
      Quote: Just a Traveler
      There are no interests in Russia there and cannot be.
      Н

      1. Russia does not need an oil pipeline from the Gulf to Europe (competitive advantages are lost)
      2. Russia needs Syrian oil.
      3. Russia needs contracts for the restoration of Syria
      4. Russia needs an arms market
      5. Russia is testing new weapons in real combat conditions.
      ............ And you say there are no interests. + To all, political interests. hi
  21. Just a Traveler 13 March 2020 12: 25 New
    • 2
    • 3
    -1
    Quote: Cyrus
    I look cowardly liberal stupid rats got to VO, no place for you here no place.


    We’ll figure it out without you)
    1. Cyrus 17 March 2020 11: 18 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      Do not understand, you can’t even figure out your desires)
  22. Morgan 13 March 2020 16: 47 New
    • 4
    • 2
    +2
    "Recep Erdogan, when he stated that" Russia should leave Syria "" - Erdogan says the case, we should listen. In any case, sooner or later this will happen, and most importantly, there’s no sense in it.
    1. Aleksandr1971 14 March 2020 16: 12 New
      • 1
      • 3
      -2
      It is better not to leave Syria even after the end of the civil war, because from the territory of Syria it is possible to monitor the space of the Mediterranean Sea, first of all, to create a threat to those NATO ships from which a missile strike on Russian territory is possible. So far, Russia does not have such an opportunity. But I hope that after some time the naval group of the Russian Navy in the Mediterranean Sea will be restored to serious values.
  23. fif21 13 March 2020 21: 38 New
    • 1
    • 2
    -1
    Syria is a "bone in the throat" in countries such as Israel, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Turkey. Israel is concerned about Hezbollah, Kuvet, SA and UAE need an oil pipeline to Europe, Turkey is worried by the Kurds. Non-interference of Russia would lead to the fact that Assad would be replaced by a politician loyal to these countries, Syria would lose part of the territory, oil would pass under the control of multinational companies and other countries. A bridgehead would also be created in Syria to change regime in Iran. But the game is not over yet. Turkey is a direct intervention, without declaring war. Hired by the SA, UAE .... The United States took control of the eastern oil regions — direct intervention, without declaring war. Israel is bombing Hezbollah. About ISIS no longer heard! Remaining barmalei funded by the Gulf countries and Turkey, they are opposed by the forces of the SAA and Iran. hi
  24. Ural resident 14 March 2020 17: 51 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Erdogan is moving towards the restoration of the Ottoman Empire. And not only he - there is a whole group of nationalists. They plan to join gradually, this process can go on for decades. The same area, Sanjak Alexandretta, successfully captured by the Turks is a prime example. The local population will be squeezed out from the territories that the Turks will capture and the territory will be settled by the Turks - so they don’t see any problems there. The north of Syria - squeezed from the Kurds - is heavily populated by Turkomans. Idlib also clearly planned to populate their own, and eventually vote for majority accession. The gangs would simply move further south, grabbing territory piece by piece.
    Here, by the way, this is what the Americans understand, and also, I think they will oppose it. They do not need anyone's reinforcement, not even their "ally." They need Turkey first of all as a conductor of their influence in the Middle East. And the Arab world will somehow resist.
    1. KARAKURT15 15 March 2020 23: 25 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      Is it more visible from the Urals?)) In the north of Syria, the Kurds have never lived, but the Turkoman have lived there for 11 centuries. It would not hurt to acquire a training manual before writing anything.
  25. Spiridonovich2 14 March 2020 22: 09 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Or maybe Russia should have the main interests in its own country and concern for its own people? Not only are the people poor. turning into homeless, the Russian nation is rapidly dying. 9,4 thousand rubles for a senior citizen, this is a direct path to a quick extinction. And the salary, if there is work, is 15 thousand rubles? With this money you can create a family? Whose interests are we protecting in Syria, swelling hundreds of millions there and losing our boys killed? Lost all the former republics of the USSR, the last Belarus, and now they have found interests in Syria.
    1. Aleksandr1971 15 March 2020 13: 31 New
      • 0
      • 4
      -4
      In order for the people not to be poor and not to die out, it is necessary to establish a favorable foreign policy and foreign economic background.
      Don't you, Spiridonovich2, understand that the economic and political success of the countries of Western Europe and the USA once led these countries to present prosperity. Prosperity was largely due to the appropriation of other people's wealth, due to the creation of a situation where the enemy does not threaten his own borders and there is no risk that the enemy will take away the wealth of your people. The success of China, Japan and other countries of East Asia was facilitated not only by the industriousness of their peoples, but also by the fact that at a certain stage of development the West dominating in the World considered it useful for itself to maintain calm in this region.
      Russia also needs to: 1) ensure peace in this region (for itself); 2) to provide concern for other countries (because conflicts in the Middle East lead to higher oil prices than market prices); 3) create a military presence in a strategically important region for itself to neutralize threats from the fleets of the West.
      If you doubt my words, then familiarize yourself with the history and logic of the foreign policy of Western countries.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Aleksandr1971 15 March 2020 13: 35 New
      • 0
      • 3
      -3
      If you make a cool bloody mess in the whole Middle East, including introducing Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, Oman and the UAE into the bloody whirl, oil prices will jump from the current 33 US $ to 300 US $. And we, the Russians, will grow rich and enjoy ...... Only this must be properly organized
      1. KARAKURT15 15 March 2020 23: 28 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        It seems to you that Shatalin himself taught laughing Do you know about you at the Ministry of Finance in general?
    4. Aleksandr1971 15 March 2020 13: 44 New
      • 0
      • 3
      -3
      You, Spiridonovich2, must understand that a favorable foreign policy background will also ensure normal domestic economic development.

      Western countries have become rich not only because their peoples were smart and hardworking. At a certain stage, Western Europe managed to become a leader, taking the wealth of the colonies, suppressing potential robbers from Asia. Of course, there were many factors that contributed to the leadership of Europe, but without the factor of foreign policy security it is impossible to develop. Even Adam Smith said that before you engage in increasing wealth, you must ensure your own security.

      The countries of East Asia began to rise recently, including (in addition to the industriousness inherent in agricultural peoples) because the West considered this to be useful for themselves, and did not begin to make swaps there.

      Russia in the 16-17th centuries first protected itself from nomad robbers (spending up to 60% of treasury expenses), and only then reached its historical greatness.

      Therefore, I with you, Spiridonovich2, do not agree that we must leave Syria. As soon as a mouse gap appears for penetration into a weakened neighboring or almost neighboring state, it is necessary to climb there to solve its own issues of enrichment, security, etc.

      If you, Spiridonovich2, do not believe my words, then read more about the history and logic of the foreign policy of Western countries.
    5. Aleksandr1971 15 March 2020 13: 45 New
      • 0
      • 3
      -3
      Some strange bug came out on the site here. Duplicated within the meaning of my message
    6. Cyrus 17 March 2020 11: 20 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      But I’m not destitute, I’m not turning into a homeless person, we work and the children are healthy (pah pah pah), what are we doing wrong?)
      1. Aleksandr1971 18 March 2020 11: 19 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        I also do not beggar. Therefore, we, Cyrus, do not care about the rest?
        1. Cyrus 20 March 2020 13: 04 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Not at all, but those who blame all their mistakes / laziness on power are unpleasant to me, why should I worry about them?
  26. Just a Traveler 19 March 2020 16: 01 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: fif21
    Quote: Just a Traveler
    There are no interests in Russia there and cannot be.
    Н

    1. Russia does not need an oil pipeline from the Gulf to Europe (competitive advantages are lost)
    2. Russia needs Syrian oil.
    3. Russia needs contracts for the restoration of Syria
    4. Russia needs an arms market
    5. Russia is testing new weapons in real combat conditions.
    ............ And you say there are no interests. + To all, political interests. hi


    What kind of Syrian oil ...... who needs it? You’ll sell your own horseradish ......))))
    What is the sales market? Syria is rogue who, in principle, cannot change anything with its “purchases” on the scale of Russia. This is provided that they will have free money for it. But I’m sure ... our president will lend them at our expense.
    A test of new weapons is a particular and just laughter ....
    For those grandmothers that the defense ministry has already spent on being in Syria, we could test these weapons even on the moon. And this is not sarcasm if that ...
    1. Cyrus 20 March 2020 13: 05 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      And does he lend a lot at your expense?
    2. Aleksandr1971 20 March 2020 20: 49 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      I agree with you on all points, except for the latter - an arms test.
      But I will also add the following points: military training of combat skills and control of the territory in real conditions, and not in exercises; maintaining military bases and a military presence in the Mediterranean to put pressure on NATO fleets threatening the Russian Black Sea coast; preservation of an ally, even a lousy one; maintaining our face in the Middle East as a reliable partner, since in comparison with the West we cannot boast of money, so at least we will boast of fidelity. Loyalty is also valuable.
  27. Just a Traveler 20 March 2020 13: 13 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Cyrus
    And does he lend a lot at your expense?


    Yes, as far as it will be necessary, it will also lend)))
    Since when has the state been interested in the opinion of taxpayers ..?
    1. Aleksandr1971 20 March 2020 20: 52 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      The top of the country puts a bolt on the opinion of the bulk of the Russians. Ask people if they want a permanent president for 36 years? 90% will answer no. And then compare with the results of the rigged vote on April 22nd.