Military Review

Syrian party is not over yet

Syrian party is not over yet

Politically, Russian military intervention in Syria is a milestone for international politics, comparable in importance to the annexation of Crimea and the conflict in the Donbass. If Ukraine showed Russia's readiness to confront the West and use force to protect its interests, then in Syria Russia first intervened in a military conflict outside the former USSR in order to support an ally. Russia has demonstrated significant ability to effectively project forces into other parts of the world and a new level of combat capabilities of its Aerospace and Naval forces fleet.


Russia's entry into the war is associated with a complex set of reasons, only some of which are related to Syria. First of all, the concern of the Russian leadership was caused by a series of failures that befell the army of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in the summer of 2015. From the Russian point of view, the collapse of the ruling Syrian regime means conducting ethnic cleansing against Syrian ethnic and religious minorities and transferring the entire territory of the country under the control of the Islamic State terrorist group banned in Russia and other radical Sunni groups, the difference between which from the Russian point of view , really insignificant.

All of these groups are hostile to Russia to one degree or another, and many of them include militants from the countries of the former Soviet Union who are aimed at continuing jihad in Central Asia and the Caucasus. The Islamic state has already intensified in Afghanistan, where the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan has moved to its side, and has demonstrated impressive ability to penetrate the security forces of the Central Asian states (switching to the IG commander of the Tajik riot police Gulmurod Khalimov). The fall of Assad and the victory of the IG and the groups close to it ideologically, in addition to weakening Russia's position in the Middle East, thus carried immediate threats to its security.

Russian fears were reinforced by the return of the threat of Western countries introducing "no-fly zones" over part of Syrian territory in order to support the opposition forces. Libyan experience shows that the “no-fly zones” entered by the United States and its allies under “humanitarian” justifications inevitably develop into full-fledged air campaigns for the direct support of rebel forces. Judging by the recently published data, the decision on Western military intervention in Syria was almost agreed and disrupted at the last moment by the deployment of Russian troops in Syria.

It seems that the Russian military campaign in Syria, conducted in close coordination with Iran, has the following main objectives:

- elimination of the threat of military intervention by the West and its allies in the Syrian conflict. This task has already been solved by the fact of deployment of the Russian troops and the start of the operation;

- stabilization and strengthening of the martial law of the regime of Bashar al-Assad by eliminating the most dangerous enclaves controlled by the opposition in the rear of his army and entering more successful frontiers for defense;

- exerting limited military pressure on the IS forces in order to force it to concentrate financial and personnel resources on self-defense. This may lead to a reduction in IG activity in Central Asia;

- to the extent possible - targeted destruction from the air of groups of foreign fighters, primarily from the CIS countries as one of the most combat-ready components of the Islamist forces, representing an immediate danger to the security of Russia itself.

If these tasks are successfully accomplished, the threats of defeat of the forces of the Syrian regime will be eliminated for the foreseeable future, and the prospect of delaying the war for many years with an uncertain outcome will arise. Such a prospect is unacceptable for those who support the moderate Islamist opposition of Turkey and Saudi Arabia, who are already confronted with a constant increase in internal instability against the background of the war. This perspective is even less acceptable for the European Union, suffering from the influx of refugees, and the United States, forced to respond to the fears of its allies and partners.

Consequently, conditions arise for the commencement of negotiations on the termination of the military conflict and the post-war structure of Syria, as well as on subsequent joint actions to defeat the "Islamic State". These negotiations are likely to take place in the form of a discussion of those or other variants of the federalization of Syria with the gradual departure of Bashar al-Assad from power.

Obviously, with such a discussion, the positions of Russia and Iran are very strong, simply due to the fact that they will have the only effective military force on their side, in principle, capable of conducting offensive operations against the forces of the IG and Al-Qaeda in the Syrian theater of operations. Thus, the main objectives of the Russian campaign will be achieved: ensuring a satisfactory post-war Syria for Russia and reducing threats from local Sunni radicals for Russia.


The secondary goal is obviously the acquisition by Russia of new opportunities in the dialogue with the United States. The resumption of Russian-US summit contacts at the session of the UN General Assembly in New York, as well as the beginning of interaction between the military departments and special services of the two countries also shows that this goal can be achieved.

During the campaign, new technologies for the Russian Ministry of Defense were demonstrated, such as demonstration of video shots of air strikes and rocket launches, detailed television reports from Russian military bases, a high degree of involvement of social networks. Such a scale of propaganda should not, however, detract from the fact that the Russian air campaign is conducted by a small in size air group with very modest activity indicators. In Latakia there are only 30 attack aircraft (12 Su-24M, 12 Su-25 and six Su-34, except for them four Su-30СМ solve the tasks of air defense) of the Aerospace Forces. In the first six days of the operation (from September 30 to October 5), they carried out 120 attack combat missions, striking 51 targets.

Air force and aviation The US Navy and its allies during the Inherent Resolve operation against IS forces in Iraq and Syria during the period from June 14, 2014 to September 29, 2015 made 56 sorties (though including those providing for) and delivered 819 strikes (including 7162 strikes in Syria). And it cannot be said that this radically affected the actions of the ISIS forces, not to mention the crushing of the Caliphate. At the same time, the Western coalition used almost exclusively high-precision aviation weapon (while the Russian group also makes extensive use of the old unguided aerial bombs), it has much more effective means of reconnaissance, targeting and targeting (it suffices to mention the massive use of corresponding aircraft outboard containers that are completely absent in the Russian Aerospace Force) and, in general, has much more continuous - 25-year experience of deploying and conducting combat operations in the region with well-adjusted mechanisms of interaction and combat use of the Air Force.

From the point of view of the impact on the actual military potential of the IG, the advantages of Russia are access to probably very significant data of intelligence intelligence conducted by the special services of Bashar al-Assad. In addition, at least part of the attacks, apparently, is applied specifically to militant groups originating from Central Asia or the North Caucasus with the aim of their destruction. The influence of the Russian air campaign on the forces of the IS itself is mainly political and moral, with a limited military effect. At the same time, the actions of the Russian Aerospace Forces can have a much more significant operational impact on the situation on the front of the struggle of the CAA with other rebel groups - both “moderate”, supported by the West, and radical Islamist ones like “Nusra”.


“Pedestrian by the way of flight” is a method of working out actions on the ground during the upcoming combat sortie. Photos from the official website of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation

Russian intervention in Syria fell on a period of some stabilization of the situation for the Assad forces. It is significant that the Russian side did not go for intervention in July - early August 2015, when the CAA suffered significant defeats from the enemy forces (first of all - the radical Islamists). By September, Assad was able to restore the integrity of the front, and the offensive impulse of the Islamists was exhausted. To date, the Assad forces have been able to accumulate a certain amount of reserves, including the transfer of Iranian units to Syria and massive supplies of Iranian and Russian weapons. This led to the beginning of the recently announced large-scale offensive by the Syrian Arab Army (SAA - Ground Forces of the Syrian Armed Forces). It is the success of this offensive, and not the number of facilities hit by the Russian air force, that will determine the overall success of the Russian strategy.

The main problem for the pro-Assad forces is the presence of large Islamist enclaves (primarily in Homs and Rastan) in the territories they control, which are dragging off large forces of the CAA. This is mainly about the forces of the Army of Conquest coalition, supported by the Sunni monarchies of the Persian Gulf and Turkey and includes, among other things, the local Al-Qaida branch, known as Jabhat al-Nusra.

The primary task of the Assad is to eliminate these enclaves. As far as can be judged, a significant part of the strikes of Russian aviation is now aimed at assisting in the fight against these enclaves. In the event of the elimination of these enclaves, the subsequent tasks for the Assad forces will be a complete sweep of the areas around Aleppo, stabilization of the situation in southern Syria and, in a desirable perspective, repulse Palmyra from IG as an important communications hub, which will allow the IS to be dropped into the Syrian desert. The implementation of these tasks will lead to a significant improvement in the military-political situation of the Al-Assad regime and, in effect, remove the question of the survival of his regime from the agenda.

At the same time, opposition forces (both moderate and Islamic) also continue to increase their potential. There is pumping of moderate opposition from the United States and its allies with weapons, and Russian intervention in Syria seems to only intensify this process. In December-January, it can be expected that all kinds of opposition forces will carry out a large-scale offensive in the main key areas. Reflecting this offensive will be an important task for both the CAA and the Russian air force. The very existence of a Russian grouping can become a serious factor in delaying the opposition’s offensive - for example, until January, which is beneficial to government forces. From February to April in Syria there comes a period of Hamsim (sandstorms), which practically excludes the active actions of the parties.

Thus, if the scenario for the Dominican Republic, Tehran and Moscow is optimistic for the spring of 2016, a situation may arise in which preconditions will arise for negotiations on the possible future of Syria with the participation of the Assad regime, the “moderate” opposition and their sponsors on both sides, as well as perhaps a moderate part of the Islamists. Following this, the question of the organization of joint action against the "Islamic state" will arise.

Although the US is currently planning to intensify the fight against IS, right up to the prospects for an attack on the capital of IS Raqqu in Syria by Kurds and moderate opposition, the chances of success of this enterprise look very low. The key weakness of the United States is the lack of any significant pro-American ground forces that would be at least militarily effective and politically loyal. The systematic failures of the United States in attempts at military construction in other countries (for example, Afghanistan) force us to speak about the existence of fundamental, institutional problems.


In our opinion, the rapid and decisive defeat of the Caliphate is possible only through large-scale military intervention by Western land forces led by the United States. However, such an operation is impossible due primarily to the internal political situation in the US and the EU. The alternative is a long land campaign that will be conducted against the IS on several fronts simultaneously, using the Iraqi regular army, various Iraqi militias, Iranian forces, Assad army, Kurds, and possibly moderate Islamists from Syria. In such a motley coalition, the Assad army, reinforced by Russian air support and Russian weapons, is becoming the main force, which gives Moscow and Tehran additional trump cards in the negotiations.

At the same time, in the coming months, when Moscow’s main military efforts will be directed against Islamist groups belonging to the Army of Conquest, and to liquidate the enclaves, the prospect of worsening relations between Russia and Iran on the one hand and Turkey, the Persian Gulf monarchies and other. In light of this, the worst scenario for the Russian side (but rather realistic) is the inability of the Assad forces to radically improve the situation, even with the support of Russian aviation. In such a situation, further growth of tension between Russia and the West cannot be ruled out, yet the attempts of the US and its allies to introduce “no-fly zones” over part of Syria to protect the opposition and increase military tensions between Russia and NATO.

Even more unfavorable developments can be Moscow’s desire to raise the stakes radically or try to achieve a quick break in the Syrian conflict by sending ground troops to Syria. This threatens Russia into a hopeless "alien" war without the possibility of winning, with further aggravation of relations with Western countries and with the desire of the latter to "exsanguinate" Russian forces in Syria and through massive support of the Syrian opposition and Islamists according to the "Afghan scenario." Judging by the statements of Russian leaders, this threat is fully recognized by the Russian leadership and the participation of the Russian regular army in ground combat operations is ruled out.

Evaluating the Russian military intervention in Syria, one should compare the risks of actions taken with the risks of inaction. Both are very high. Inaction with a high probability meant the defeat of Assad, followed by massacre of groups supporting his population, the separation of control over the country between the "Islamic State" and the Army of conquest, followed by a war between them and the likely victory of the first, as a monolithic, better organized structure. At the same time, the United States would most likely not be able to effectively influence the situation in the country due to the lack of opportunities for land operations. And the military capabilities of the Gulf monarchies, as shown by the military conflict in Yemen, are very low, regardless of the number of modern weapons purchased by them. The result would probably be a new stage of expansion of the IG with a corresponding increase in its capacity to conduct operations in geographically remote regions of the world.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. venaya
    venaya 18 October 2015 06: 02
    Russian fears were exacerbated by the return of the threat of Western countries introducing “no-fly zones” over part of Syrian territory

    No one even suggested the absence of serious difficulties in the Syrian issue, given the almost complete lack of experience in our country in such a sensitive issue.
    1. andre
      andre 18 October 2015 08: 39
      author! Only ground forces led by SaShaa? Yes, comrade Bzdukhov, we do not need a thousand aircraft against 2 stupid Bedouins in the desert, an article minus !!!
      1. inkass_98
        inkass_98 18 October 2015 09: 23
        After saying about the Russian intervention in Syria, I realized that reading further is wasting time. But read it. Lost the time.
        The participation of our VKS in the hostilities at the request of the legitimate government of the country cannot be an intervention. The coalition of Western countries is precisely the collective intervention, since no one has called them to Syria.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. The comment was deleted.
        1. Weyland
          Weyland 18 October 2015 15: 43
          Quote: yushch
          I will quote the old Greek saying

          Actually, it is, EMNIP, from Rustaveli ... smile
        2. The comment was deleted.
      4. The comment was deleted.
  2. Cossack Ermak
    Cossack Ermak 18 October 2015 06: 17
    God bless Assad and us in the success of the ground operation. Collect the remnants of the country little by little and knock this scum into the sands.
    1. hrych
      hrych 18 October 2015 09: 08
      When they find themselves in the sands, and they find themselves there, their "heroic" raids on shaitan-mobiles will end there, you need fuel and lubricants and water for cooling, in this sense camels are much more reliable, plus, if necessary, they can be devoured ...
      the prospect of aggravation of relations between Russia and Iran on the one hand and Turkey, the monarchies of the Persian Gulf and the United States on the other

      The monarchies are fighting in Yemen and their affairs are not important, the Kurds are fighting with the Turks and when pressure on them is from the south, i.e. ISIS will weaken, battle-hardened fighters of Peshmerga and PKK will simply take away the mountainous regions of Turkey. The same USA sits tightly in Afghanistan ... i.e. all opponents of the Russian-Iranian Union on the battlefield in Syria are cruelly connected to the battle theater of other wars. Plus, waging an economic war against our union and holding back the price of oil, the monarchies, and above all the SA, were on the verge of bankruptcy. The same warning about MANPADS was not made by our Foreign Ministry by accident, this will appear in Syria, and will appear in Yemen, Afghanistan and Turkish Kurdistan ... Plus, our new ally, Egypt, who, having supported the Russian Federation, is waiting to privatize Saudi wells and the PRC, which has the Uyghur problem and the thousands of Uyghurs in ISIS that the Assad’s fall field grabbing their bloody friends will go there first. In a word, everything is not so bad on the fronts of the Third World; according to its results, Turkey and the Kingdoms should not be on the map. And the time has come to create Kurdistan ...
  3. sl22277
    sl22277 18 October 2015 06: 34
    Good luck and victory in the fight against terror! No one expects from government troops, exhausted and bloodless, an immediate triumph. Everything will come with time, I just want this wonderful time to come quickly.
  4. slizhov
    slizhov 18 October 2015 06: 42
    Russia already has no way back.
    "The enemy will be defeated! Victory will be ours!"
  5. maiman61
    maiman61 18 October 2015 06: 55
    Ruslan Pukhov, a corrupt journalist, "Russian military intervention in Syria". For how many pieces of silver did you sell your soul? Dirty terrorists cutting heads of people, USA, Turkey, Saud. Arabia, Qatar, in his opinion, are angels, beacons of democracy, and Russia acting at the request of the LEGAL government of Syria is invaders! Burn in Hell Ruslan Pukhov!
    1. dmi.pris
      dmi.pris 18 October 2015 14: 54
      I think that this is a pseudonym, and the real name is clearly not of Slavic origin. However, the family is not without a freak .. maybe.
      Quote: maiman61
      Ruslan Pukhov, a corrupt journalist, "Russian military intervention in Syria". For how many pieces of silver did you sell your soul? Dirty terrorists cutting heads of people, USA, Turkey, Saud. Arabia, Qatar, in his opinion, are angels, beacons of democracy, and Russia acting at the request of the LEGAL government of Syria is invaders! Burn in Hell Ruslan Pukhov!
  6. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 18 October 2015 06: 58
    Assessing the Russian military intervention in Syria, one should compare the risks from the actions taken with the risks of inaction. Both of them are very high. Inaction with high probability meant the defeat of Assad, followed by massacre of the supporting groups of the population, ...

    The author is a clear liberalist, who writes the obvious, while at the same time evaluating the actions of the VKS strict on "Rain". Calm down, fortunately, your influence on events is absolutely negligible. If Russia threw its aerospace forces to defend the state, which risks turning into something that will become the basis for an obscurantism attack on Russia from the South (about Europe, I’m silent. If it doesn’t change its mind, it will become Muslim in 20 years and be crushed under their needs), which means that it was impossible otherwise.
    1. guard
      guard 18 October 2015 08: 40
      to all of us, first of all, the West offers to distinguish between terrorists, moderate and non-moderate, radical Islamists and those who eat the bodies of their defeated, by the way the USA actively supports them! Maybe now we should also distinguish between liberals and those who defend their interests and, accordingly, receive funding from:
      1 usa
      2 Europe.
      The author of this article is clearly European, because the article talks about the dangers of Europe, which means it generally supports the actions of Russia!
  7. Hubun
    Hubun 18 October 2015 08: 24
    Our help is definitely needed. Whatever they shouted at rallies
  8. Nonna
    Nonna 18 October 2015 08: 28
    When already in VO cease to post nonsense homegrown liberals? Whatever the day - it is mandatory from the 5th column a bunch of crap.
    1. Hey
      Hey 18 October 2015 09: 15
      First of all your enemies, as they say, you need to know in person.
      Secondly, this is a kind of test whether we can see or hear that sweet lie in speeches and not give in to the temptation to accept it.
  9. Nyrobsky
    Nyrobsky 18 October 2015 09: 25
    Article minus!
    To begin with, the author needs to understand what the concept of "intervention" means, and only after that take on the forecasts.
    Without batting an eye, this "analyte" hung on Russia "resisting the West in Ukraine with the use of force" as an established and indisputable fact. Although it is a no brainer that if Russia used force against the juntars, then Ukraine would have been singing the anthem of the Soviet Union for at least a year.
    About Syria - all nonsense. What kind of US fight with ISIS is he broadcasting here?
    America, first of all, needs to turn itself off from ISIS organized crime group partners. They do not even want to recognize ISIS as a terrorist organization, justifying this by saying that ISIS is an al-Qaeda structure, which, however, the United States created))).
  10. alicante11
    alicante11 18 October 2015 09: 53
    The article is specifically pro-American.
    Russia in Syria solves 2 problems. The first is to protect Assad both from defeat from Islamists and from interference from the West, Turkey or Israel. The second is the defeat of ISIS "on the distant approaches." The first and the main task has already been solved. But the second one, of course, mainly depends on Assad and the Iranians. In theory, Russia could conduct a ground operation. The purpose of this operation would be to defeat the main ISIS groups. Whereas the cleansing and counter-partisan actions would remain to the lot of the Assadis. Such an operation would be short-lived (recall the Iraqi campaign) and does not imply significant losses. Because the regular Armed Forces of the Russian Federation have an overwhelming firepower over ISIS semi-partisan units. But, given the complexities of logistics, deploying a large group for several weeks is too costly and time-consuming. And leaving the troops for a longer period means putting them in danger of losses in a guerrilla war. Therefore, this option, I think, is the most extreme, if the natives will not cope at all.
  11. isergil
    isergil 18 October 2015 09: 58
    This liberal clique no longer knows how else to please the Black Lord. One gets the impression that "Pukhov" is a pseudonym for a Western propagandist: the United States is a beacon and bearer of democracy, Russia is an interventionist. We are already tired of reading this. "Voennoye Obozreniye", you have no one else to print?
  12. provincial
    provincial 18 October 2015 10: 18
    it is necessary that articles by Nadezhdin, Goizman and other "liberals" appear on VO, otherwise the face of VO is not visible.
    1. rotmistr60
      rotmistr60 18 October 2015 11: 08
      Yes, we already hear and see them more often than others. They (these enemies of Russia) to the bulb of our comments. For neither the main thing is to be read abroad. Otherwise, these ... will not work for a living.
  13. v.yegorov
    v.yegorov 18 October 2015 10: 41
    Russia has demonstrated considerable ability to effectively project forces into other parts of the world and a new level of combat capabilities of its Aerospace Forces and the Navy.

    We declared ourselves in full voice, perhaps scared someone, persuaded someone
    to themselves, someone was forced to think. They advertised their weapons. This is all a plus. On the other hand, some were pissed off to the extreme, and the level of confrontation rose sharply. Philosophically approaching, all the same, this should have happened sometime, and Russia always got into wars, not ready for them. Well,
    everywhere you can’t lay straws. Let's hope for our innermost - where is the curve
    take out.
  14. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 18 October 2015 11: 05
    Russian military intervention in Syria

    Already for such a start it is worth putting a (-) article. I don’t want to comment further - my colleagues expressed their opinion very well.
  15. Yuyuka
    Yuyuka 18 October 2015 11: 50
    at first I read it - like a normal guy, he zababahala such an article! after a few paragraphs - I understood another "lick" of the United States, or, judging by the time of writing and taking into account the time difference, just a "partner" from there. "Intervention" - ?? Yes, you, my friend, are not drunk in the morning! Well, at least read the Russian explanatory dictionary for a start, before writing nonsense! And the fact that our "old" bombs, inaccurate weapons, well, we are far behind the "partners", they even do not take us as allies and do not indicate targets - we will miss it anyway! Our means of destruction will not be able to hit either the hospital or the substation!
  16. lopvlad
    lopvlad 18 October 2015 12: 04
    Russian military intervention in Syria

    for these words of the author of the article, you need to get wet with a snout until the end of the century. And beyond these words of his above, the article of the author can not be read.
  17. Aleksandr1959
    Aleksandr1959 18 October 2015 12: 26
    From the Internet :
    Indeed, right before our eyes, a fierce redistribution of the entire globe began ... The geopolitical balance of power on the planet is changing dramatically, strategically. And in this whole Great Game, as is already obvious, Russia plays a key role, speaking on equal terms with other great world powers. The whole world is really looking at our Russia today /
  18. olegfbi
    olegfbi 18 October 2015 12: 51
    Consequently, conditions arise for the commencement of negotiations on the termination of the military conflict and the post-war structure of Syria, as well as on subsequent joint actions to defeat the "Islamic State". These negotiations are likely to take place in the form of a discussion of those or other variants of the federalization of Syria with the gradual departure of Bashar al-Assad from power.

    Negotiations have already begun in "Full Growth", but not quite in the way the author of the article claims.
    It seems that there will be a full-fledged base of the RF Armed Forces in Syria, there is almost no doubt about this. Hence the negotiations are completely different!
  19. alex shnajder
    alex shnajder 18 October 2015 17: 55
    the people were too late excited - the land contingent of the Russian Federation in Syria for about 2000.
  20. Vlad5307
    Vlad5307 18 October 2015 18: 38
    "elimination of the threat of military intervention by the West and its allies in the Syrian conflict. This task has already been solved by the very fact of the deployment of Russian troops and the start of the operation;"
    The West has long been interfering in Syria, though on the side of the terrorists, supporting them with equipment and weapons!
    This analyst seems to be blinded by the rhetoric of EU EU activists. What kind of intervention of Russia in Syria is he talking about - this indicates his commitment to the League of European Traitors. The Russian Federation supports ground operations of the SAR armed forces against terrorists at the invitation of the government and the president of the SAR, but the so-called an international coalition led by the SGA, what has been done there for over a year? And she, under the guise of fighting ISIS, is fighting against the ATS and its people! Therefore, the article by G. Pukhov is also hypocritical, as well as the actions of the Western coalition in Syria! am
  21. faterdom
    faterdom 18 October 2015 22: 34
    This "Pukhov" should take part with Vitaly in some debate about "artifacts", I think it will be interesting to listen to both erudites.
  22. Bob
    Bob 18 October 2015 22: 42
    "... in the coming months, when Moscow's main military efforts will be directed against the Islamist groups that make up the Army of Conquest and at the elimination of enclaves, the prospect of aggravation of relations between Russia and Iran on the one hand and Turkey, the monarchies of the Persian Gulf and the United States with other".
    I believe that the article is generally poorly organized, and therefore the responses to it are generally negative, and this is true. The fact that Russia is called an interventionist cannot cause positive reviews, only its enemies can have.
    However, the quote above is not without meaning. In Syria, the interests of world and regional powers were mixed. The causes of the war are not regional, but global. This is indicated by the composition of the participants, the interests of the parties, the goals of the war, the consistency of the Middle East conflicts entwined into a single ball, where Syria is only a link in the chain of events.
    So one of the significant reasons for the war in Syria, which was not named by the author, could be the division of the European and world energy markets. Syria "got" in the way of the Middle Eastern monarchies trying to implement the project of transporting gas from the large gas field "Pars" from Qatar through Saudi Arabia-Jordan-Syria-Turkey to Europe (South, Center and East)Северное/Южный_Парс

    I think this is the reason for the West's participation in the Middle East conflict - to ensure stable access to oil and gas resources in the cheapest way - by land - while "excluding" Russia from Europe's trading partners.
    The rich monarchies of the Persian Gulf aim to conquer the European market and this is their business interest. However, there is a religious aspect to the Syrian issue - the war against Shiites in the person of Iraqis, Iranians and Syrians. It is the religious aspect that allows the Saudis and Qatars (of a radical sense) to mobilize more and more militants for the war, using their power to conquer more and more territories in the Middle East and further in Europe, Central Asia and Russia, in order to ultimately establish the Caliphate there. And in this impulse (the destruction of common enemies) the interests of the seemingly different sides came together - the West, the monarchies of the Persian Gulf and the radical leaders of Islam.
    1. NordUral
      NordUral 19 October 2015 00: 14
      I agree with you - we cannot afford war, but even less so, geopolitical defeats. And there are too many problems within the country. But it is necessary to solve internal and external challenges in parallel. But for this, the primary task is to solve internal problems. By resolving internal contradictions - egregious social inequality and corruption, we will only become stronger. And we can more actively influence the state of affairs on our borders and more.
  23. Bob
    Bob 18 October 2015 22: 44
    Considering the declared goals and interests of the parties, we can say that in this war everyone is fighting against everyone, using temporary allies (ISIS fighters) to achieve "success". I would like to believe that Russia does not belong to this group of shape-shifting countries and we are not surrendering our allies, but remembering Yugoslavia, this belief does not increase. At the same time, in Syria, Russia has not only allied relations, but also a business model of existence - a sacred oil and gas pipe directed to Europe in the first place, and we are trying not to lose this market with all our might. Therefore, the stakes in this war are much higher than those described by the author of the article.
    It makes no sense to talk about the future in this situation of general chaos. It is impossible to calculate something in advance, fighting with fanatics. Their strategy is in chaos and fear, which, in their opinion, should clear the way for them to power. Today millions of refugees are pouring into Europe, and tomorrow Europe will be gripped by terror, deservedly or not, this is another "song". But the fact is obvious - the radicals have penetrated into Europe and it is a matter of time before they start blowing up.
    Russia, therefore, needs to take care not of its sacred cow - the economy of the pipe - trying to suppress the fire of the war in Syria, but to dump this model as unpromising in a garbage bin, and finally start building a new Russia - high-tech, advanced in science and education with its own independent financial system (not controlled by either the West or China or anyone else), food security, with their first-tier national companies in the sixth technological order (which has just begun to take shape), this is what is called ECONOMY AND SOCIETY OF KNOWLEDGE. And to realize this way need affordable and high-tech universal education and medicine. It’s not like the budget for 2016 has planned so little resources for education (90% of the level of 2015, if you recalculate them to the level of spending of the USSR or Japan and the USA for education in relative units, it will turn out to be miserable) for medicine (84% of the level 2015).
  24. NordUral
    NordUral 19 October 2015 00: 09
    This one word, namely "intervention", speaks of the author's position, which, as a citizen of Russia, I cannot share. I, like most of my fellow citizens, do not want to see the fall and torn apart of Syria, similar to the collapse of Iraq and, moreover, Libya. And I don't want to see hordes of medieval bandits on our borders and in the former Soviet republics of Central Asia.
  25. vladimirw
    vladimirw 19 October 2015 12: 19
    Assessing Russian military intervention in Syria.
    I do not like the word intervention, we are at the request of the current president!
  26. iouris
    iouris 19 October 2015 14: 49
    To "crush the Caliphate" means to restore the sovereignty and integrity of Iraq and Syria. ISIS is an instrument of economic war against the Russian Federation, the budget of which depends on gas and oil. ISIS is reducing the cost of gas and oil and the price of energy for "Western partners." It is not a fact that the Russian Federation, as a sovereign state, will be able to manage to rebuild the socio-economic model of development. Although there are still optimists who believe that the point of no return has not yet been passed.
  27. Bob
    Bob 19 October 2015 20: 43
    Quote: iouris
    Not the fact that the Russian Federation as a sovereign state will be able to manage to rebuild the socio-economic model of development. Although there are still optimists who believe that the point of no return has not yet been passed.

    The need for structural adjustment of the economy of the Russian Federation has been declared by many, starting from the first person in the state and ending with the last official. The problem is that things didn’t go beyond the declaration.
    Yes, probably I am an optimist about the possibility of changing the socio-economic development model. However, I am also a realist, because I have learned my lesson very well and I know the mechanism of forming the country's competitiveness. There is a very famous scientist - Michael Porter, who owns the work "Competitive Advantages of Nations" (published in the USSR back in 1985 by the Progress publishing house). Porter identified 4 stages in the development of a nation's competitive advantage:
    1) based on production factors (the availability of material, labor and other resources - cheap and high-quality in sufficient quantities create the country's competitiveness)
    2) on the basis of investments (attracting investments to the country and placing them in the most efficient way)
    3) on the basis of innovation (creating a competitive advantage by superiority in the 5th and now in the 6th technological structure)
    4) the stage of wealth (when the competitive forces decay, and the country loses its competitiveness)
    Russia, being the legal successor of the USSR in the 20th century, was already a leader in 4 technological modes (access to space, construction of infrastructure, nuclear energy, world-class engineering, etc., etc.) and unfortunately closer to 1970-80. ceded leadership to the West, where at that time 5 technologies were forged - microelectronics, computer technology, digital technology, communication technology, the Internet, supercomputers, etc., etc.
    At present, in Russia, the share of technologies of the 5th generation is 10%, the 4th generation is 50%, the 3rd generation is 30%, the 6th technological structure (nanoelectronics, biotechnology, etc.) is 0%.
    The country demonstrates the competitive advantages of the lowest level - due to production factors, selling oil, gas and metals in exchange for everything else. A similar practice and development model is characteristic of countries on the periphery of world development. I am sure that such a development model (of a banana republic where landowners and oligarchs of all stripes are the barons, and the people are cattle) is fatal to Russia. Since it does not provide any of the important development goals, it is ensuring technological, military, food, and information security. For Russia, the only way out is to mobilize resources (financial, material, intellectual) in order to enter the 6th technological order and gain leadership in it. It’s approximately the same as it does in military technology - offering high-tech products competitive in all respects - both in the performance characteristics and in price and in assortment. I am sure that there is no other way. Oh yes, I forgot, there is an alternative solution - to shatter the Middle Eastern monarchies and become the sole ruler of the world oil market in an instant. But this is Armageddon. And you are sure that this is the only correct solution to the problem ?!