Discover more from Beyond the Ideological
"Power is given only to those who dare to lower themselves and pick it up.
Only one thing matters, one thing; to be able to dare!"
Dostoevsky, Crime and Punishment
The U.S.-led order in the Middle East faces mounting challenges, with multiple global powers actively asserting influence in the region. China is forging closer ties with Gulf allies through economic agreements, Iran continues to expand its nuclear program, and Russia, capitalizing on every opportunity, is establishing military bases and undermining the U.S. security framework.
In this context, Russia’s focus on Syria is particularly noteworthy. Historically, the Soviet Union viewed al-Assad’s Syria not simply as an ally or partner in its rivalry with the United States but as a strategic asset—a tool to buy time and secure critical advantages.
This perspective is not just a relic of the past; it remains central to Moscow’s current approach, as it entrenches its presence and exploits Syria’s pivotal location to bolster its regional influence.
In this regard, an article from The New York Times dating back to 1990 offers striking parallels to today’s realities. Titled “Trouble in Damascus” and written by Alan Cowell, Chief of the Times’ Cairo Bureau, it sheds light on dynamics that seem to echo in the present.
The article captures how Syria, even then, was perceived as both a weak link and a critical chess piece—a lens through which we can better understand Russia’s enduring strategy and the broader implications for the U.S.-led order today.
A few excerpts:
“Within the Arab world, Syria's position is precarious - mired in the chaos of Lebanon, challenged by Iraq. At home, discontent has spread from private economic complaints to the limited political arena permitted by the dominant Baath Party.”
“On a far wider scale, it is the sense of a global pull-back from confrontation between Moscow and Washington that has most troubled Damascus. Preoccupied with its own turmoil, and seeking a moderating role in the Middle East, the Soviet Union - long Syria's supplier of expensive and advanced warplanes, missile and radar systems - has served notice that it will no longer support Assad's aim of achieving what he calls strategic parity with Israel - a concept supposed to discourage Israel from what the Syrians see as an inherent expansionism.”
Indeed, Syria's position within Russia's strategic framework holds significant importance, even if it is not an immediate priority like Ukraine.
Russia's military installations in Syria, particularly the naval facility in Tartus and the Hmeimim airbase, are pivotal for projecting power and achieving broader geopolitical objectives. These bases enable Moscow to exert pressure on NATO in the Mediterranean, challenge Western maritime operations, and influence regional dynamics.
Additionally, Russia's proximity to Turkey via its Syrian bases grants leverage over Ankara, facilitating negotiations on critical issues such as Black Sea security and energy transit routes—key areas for undermining NATO's cohesion. Russia’s military facilities also enhance logistical coordination, linking Russia's presence in Syria to its expanding operations in Africa, particularly in the Sahel.
Instead of fearmongering, the United States and Europe should view the fall of Bashar al-Assad as a strategic opportunity to exploit, marking the collapse of the Russo-Iranian puppet regime and weakening Putin's broader anti-NATO agenda.
Along those lines, in my latest piece for the National Interest, I explain Putin’s miscalculations and what it means for the United States and its allies:
Israel’s decisive strikes against Iran’s proxies have triggered a domino effect, which Turkey has adeptly leveraged to destabilize the Russian-Iranian alliance in Syria, further threatening Russia’s regional foothold.
As Ukraine continues to resist Putin’s onslaught, the United States stands at a pivotal juncture. This moment offers a unique opportunity to bolster U.S. deterrence, not only in the Middle East but also in the Sahel, where regional stability is increasingly at stake.
Forging strategic cooperation with Turkey in Syria and Libya could prove transformative. Such a partnership would yield mutual benefits by further weakening the Iran-Russia security axis and realigning the regional balance of power. Moreover, it would position the United States and its allies to play a decisive role in shaping the future of a democratic post-Assad Syria.
Additionally, it would enable the United States to regain a strong posture in North Africa and the Sahel, countering the influence Russia has invested significant time and resources in cultivating. By acting decisively, the United States can reclaim leadership in these critical regions and safeguard its long-term strategic interests. It’s now or never.
While I believe the fall of Bashar al-Assad is good news, I cannot stress enough the urgency for the West to break free from the paralysis that has hindered its ability to act decisively in critical moments.
The Syrian civil war marked the beginning of a prolonged cycle of Russian military adventurism beyond Europe, and the collapse of those who sustained it signals that they no longer dictate the terms.
“Forging strategic cooperation with Turkey in Syria and Libya could prove transformative. Such a partnership would yield mutual benefits by further weakening the Iran-Russia security axis and realigning the regional balance of power. Moreover, it would position the United States and its allies to play a decisive role in shaping the future of a democratic post-Assad Syria.” (Zineb Riboua)
Turkey seems to be unalterably opposed to Israel despite the fact that Israel’s decapitaion of Hezbollah and even Turkish ally Hamas has opened up numerous strategic opportunities for Turkey. Moreover Turkey is affording itself the opportunity to increase its pressure on the Syrian Kurds. Despite its own major incursion into Syria, Erdogan has been highly critical of Israel’s minor incursion into Syria.
Zineb, how does the United States reconcile its support for Israel (which will only become more enthusiastic on Trump’s watch) with the development of a strategic partnership with Turkey?