If a date needs to fixed marking the end
of "post-Soviet era" in world politics, it might
fall on February 4, 2012. Russia and China's
double veto of the Arab League resolution on Syria
in the United Nations Security Council constitutes
a watershed event.
Curiously, the
secretary general of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO) Anders Fogh Rasmussen chose
the same day as the veto in New York to snub
Russia; saying that that the alliance would have
the first elements of the US's missile defense
system (ABM) up and running in Europe by the
alliance's summit in May in Chicago, no matter
Moscow's objections.
The first double veto
by Russia and China on the Syrian issue in
the United Nations
Security Council last October was a coordinated
move that sought to scuttle a resolution that
might be seized by the Western alliance to mount a
military operation in Syria. But the repeat double
veto on a motion pressing Syria's President Bashar
al-Assad to abandon power conveys a much bigger
meaning.
Makings of proxy war
The Syrian situation has evolved since
October and has surged as a geopolitical struggle
over the future of the Iranian regime, control of
the Middle East's oil and the perpetuation of the
West's preponderant influence in that region.
Russia and China sense that they could be booted
out of the Middle East.
With the double
veto, the only option available for the US and its
allies in Syria is to flout both international law
and the UN charter and overthrow the regime in
Damascus. Indeed, the option exists to backtrack
from the path of covert intervention, but it is a
remote possibility. According to former Central
Intelligence Agency officer Philip Giraldi,
writing in the current issue of The American
Conservative magazine:
Unmarked NATO warplanes are arriving
at Turkish military bases close to Iskenderum on
the Syrian border, delivering weapons from the
late Muammar Gaddafi's arsenals as well as
volunteers from the Libyan Transitional National
Council who are experienced in pitting local
volunteers against trained soldiers, a skill
they acquired confronting Gaddafi's army.
Iskenderum is also the seat of the Free Syrian
Army, the armed wing of the Syrian National
Council. French and British special forces
trainers are on the ground, assisting the Syrian
rebels while the CIA [Central Intelligence
Agency] and US Spec Ops are providing
communications equipment and intelligence to
assist the rebel cause, enabling the fighters to
avoid concentrations of Syrian
soldiers.
Giraldi adds that the CIA
analysts themselves are "skeptical regarding the
approach to war", as they know that the frequently
cited United Nations account of civilians killed
is based largely on rebel sources and
uncorroborated. The CIA has "refused to sign off
on the claims" of mass defections from the Syrian
Army. Likewise, accounts of pitched battles
between deserters and loyal soldiers "appear to be
a fabrication, with few defections being confirmed
independently".
If Washington knows the
ground realities in Syria, Moscow and Beijing know
them, too. Thus, a test of will is developing over
Syria. The US and its allies and Turkey can raise
the pitch of the overt operations. But Russia can
also raise the political and military 'cost' of
the covert war. Foreign minister Sergey Lavrov
said over the weekend that Moscow will "do its
utmost to avert a heavy-handed interference in
Syria", although it "cannot prevent a military
intervention in Syrian affairs if this decision is
made by any country."
On the other hand,
the West does not accept Russia as an arbiter in
Syria and is bent on frustrating Moscow's repeated
attempts to bring the Syrian factions and
government to political dialogue. Moscow senses
that President Bashar Al-Assad's political
standing is weakening while the West calculates
that the Russian stance becomes increasingly
untenable.
The West has chosen to ignore
China's stance. Obviously, the West is dismissive
about the dragon's pretensions in the Middle East,
whereas it takes the bear seriously, given its
vast experience historically in the affairs of
that region. So, the West's propaganda barrage is
pitting Russia as a hurdle to democratic reforms
and change in the Middle East. The US ambassador
to the UN Susan Rice chose her words carefully
while grandstanding that she felt "disgusted" at
Russia's veto.
Russia is determined not be
drawn into proxy wars which are a drain on
resources, but the West is comfortable since the
fabulously wealthy Qatari emir is prepared to
bankroll operations. Again, ditching a traditional
ally in the heat of the night could seriously dent
Russia's image in the Middle East at a historic
juncture where a renewed geopolitical struggle is
just about commencing, which would have long-term
global impact. Keeping Russia, an energy
powerhouse, from developing bonhomie with the
oil-rich Persian Gulf oligarchies has been a
priority in Western strategies through the past
several decades.
To be sure, Lavrov and
the head of Russia's Foreign Intelligence Mikhail
Fradkov are proceeding to Damascus on Tuesday. The
Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement on
Sunday, "Russia, in consultation with other
countries, is firmly set to seek the quickest
stabilization of the situation in Syria along the
paths of the quickest implementation of
long-overdue democratic transformations."
The statement welcomed a continuance of
the Arab League observer-mission to Syria, "which
has proved its efficiency as a factor in
de-escalating the violence." The sense of urgency
is palpable, but the West is certain to block
Lavrov's mission.
But the West is also
unsure about pushing the envelope since its proxy,
Burhan Ghalioun of the so-called Syrian National
Council (a Syrian exile and academic in Sorbonne
University) as yet finds little acceptance within
Syria. Even his return to Damascus is problematic.
And all this while the civil war is spreading
inside Syria. Thus, the situation is fast
acquiring the makings of a Cold War-era proxy war.
The backdrop is also fraught with
disturbing parallels. China has come under US
pressure with the latter's declaration of its
"strategic turn" to Asia.
'Russia-China
concerns' Following the setting up of a US
military base in Australia, Washington is
currently engaged in talks with Manila to increase
the American military presence in Southeast Asia.
Manila is open to hosting American ships and
surveillance aircraft, holding joint military
exercises and asking the US back two decades after
American forces were evicted from the Subic Bay,
their biggest base in the Pacific.
At the
annual Munich security conference over the
weekend, Beijing registered its displeasure. Vice
Foreign Minister Zhang Zhijun warned "countries
outside Asia" to desist from attempts to
"deliberately highlight the military and security
agenda, create tension or strengthen military
presence or alliance" in the region or "impose
their will on Asia". He asserted, "The Asian way
should be respected" and he warned against "any
attempt to twist international rules." Zhang
underlined that the rise of Asia "signals a move
towards greater balance in the international power
structure."
Significantly, the Beijing
newspaper, The Global Times also pointed out
recently that the US's belligerent projection of
military might increasingly leaves Beijing and
Moscow with no choice but to react. It said:
So far Moscow and Beijing are
relatively restrained, though NATO seeks to
expand its strategic presence in East Europe and
US strengthening its military alliances in Asia.
But the two cannot fall back forever. For
Beijing and Moscow alike, ties with the US have
been stressful. The two don't want to set off
external doubts in their heated relations. But
in both countries, an increasing number of
people now advocate a Moscow-Beijing 'alliance'.
The two do have countermeasures against the US,
and they are capable of deterring US allies. If
they are really determined to join hands, the
balance of power on many world issues will begin
to shift.
Equally, Moscow's ties with
the West have deteriorated. The US-Russia talks on
the ABM are in deadlock. Washington rejects
Moscow's plea for a legally binding guarantee that
the US's ABM deployments in Europe will not impact
Russia's strategic deterrent.
Dmitry
Rogozin, Russia's deputy prime minister, said in
Moscow recently that the US and its NATO allies at
present have 1,000 missiles capable of
intercepting Russia's intercontinental ballistic
missiles, covering all European Russia up to the
Ural mountains. He said:
There are no guarantees that after
the first, second, and third phases [of the US'
ABM project] are completed, there will be no
fourth, fifth and sixth. Do you really think
they will halt all their technologies after
2020? That's nonsense! They will go ahead with
developing and boosting technical parameters of
their interceptor missiles and performance
capabilities of their warning [missile defense]
systems ...
The fact that the missile
defense system can hit strategic missiles and
the fact that those bases and fleet are deployed
in northern seas demonstrate the obvious
anti-Russian nature of the [US] missile
defense.
Clearly, the Russian and
Chinese double veto on the Syrian resolution
represents a coordinated move to challenge the US
on its triumphalist march from Libya toward Syria
and Iran. Lavrov spoke to his Chinese counterpart
Yang Jiechen just before the voting in the
Security Council. While casting his veto, Chinese
ambassador to the UN Li Baodong said, "China
supports the revised proposals raised by Russia."
Xinhua news agency commented that the
double veto "aimed at further seeking peaceful
settlement" in Syria and "preventing possible
drastic and risky solutions". It pointedly
explained the "Russia-China concerns" over Syria.
The Chinese commentaries highlight that
"globalization has dedicated a new logic in
international relations" and Syria is a key
theater for the West's agenda to make the Middle
East their sphere of influence.
Ambassador M K Bhadrakumar was a
career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service. His
assignments included the Soviet Union, South
Korea, Sri Lanka, Germany, Afghanistan, Pakistan,
Uzbekistan, Kuwait and Turkey.
(Copyright 2012 Asia Times Online
(Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us about sales, syndication and
republishing.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
