Syria
on the boil, US warship in Black
Sea By M K Bhadrakumar
Seldom it is that the Russian Foreign
Ministry chooses a Sunday to issue a formal
statement. Evidently, something of extreme gravity
arose for Moscow to speak out urgently. The
provocation was the appearance of a United States
guided missile cruiser in the Black Sea for naval
exercises with Ukraine. The USS Monterrey
cruiser equipped with the AEGIS air defense system
is taking part in joint Ukrainian-US exercises,
Sea Breeze 2011.
There is nothing
extraordinary about a US-Ukraine naval exercise.
Last year, too, an exercise took place. But, as
Moscow posed, "While leaving aside the unsettled
issue of a possible European missile shield
architecture, Russia would like to know, in
compliance with the Russia-NATO [North Atlantic
Treaty Organization] Lisbon summit decisions, what
'aggravation' the US command meant by moving the
basic strike unit of the regional
missile defense grouping being
formed by NATO in the region, from the
Mediterranean to the East?"
The Foreign
Ministry statement then went on to give its own
explanation that the Monterrey was sent to
European waters as part of the US administration's
phased adaptive approach to building the European
segment of the global missile shield. The
program's first stage envisages the deployment of
a group of US warships in the Adriatic, Aegean and
Mediterranean Seas to protect South Europe from
possible missile strikes. The role of the US
warship's missiles in the Sea Breeze 2011
anti-piracy exercises is also unclear, the
statement said.
"We have to state that our
concerns continue to be ignored and under the
guise of talks on European missile shield
cooperation, efforts are under way to build the
missile shield configuration whose consequences
are dangerous and about which we have numerously
informed our US and NATO partners," the Russian
statement added.
The US claims that this
is a routine naval exercise. On the other hand,
Moscow asks: "If this is an ordinary visit, then
it is unclear why a warship with this type of
armament was chosen to move to this quite
sensitive region."
Without doubt, the US
is stepping up pressure on Russia's Black Sea
fleet. The US's provocation is taking place
against the backdrop of the turmoil in Syria.
Russia is stubbornly blocking US attempts to drum
up a case for Libya-style intervention in Syria.
Moscow understands that a major reason for the US
to push for regime change in Syria is to get the
Russian naval base in that country wound up.
The Syrian base is the only toehold Russia
has in the Mediterranean region. The Black Sea
Fleet counts on the Syrian base for sustaining any
effective Mediterranean presence by the Russian
navy. With the establishment of US military bases
in Romania and the appearance of the US warship in
the Black Sea region, the arc of encirclement is
tightening. It is a cat-and-mouse game, where the
US is gaining the upper hand.
Ostensibly,
the regime headed by Bashar al-Assad is repressive
since almost everyday reports are coming out that
more bloodshed has taken place. But the Western
reports are completely silent as to the assistance
that the Syrian opposition is getting from
outside. No one is interested in probing or
questioning, for instance, the circumstances in
which 120 Syrian security personnel could have
been shot and killed in one "incident".
The Western, Saudi, Israeli and Turkish
involvement in Syria's unrest is almost crystal
clear but that is beyond the zone of discussion
when we speak of "Syria on the boil". In short,
Russia has lost the information war over Syria.
Henceforth, its dilemma will be that it will be
seen as being obstructionist and illogical when a
laudable democratization process is unfolding in
Syria and the "Arab Spring" is straining to make
an appearance.
Moscow has made it clear
that it will not brook a resolution at the United
Nations Security Council over Syria, no matter its
wording or contents. It also voted against the
Western move at the International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) last week to open a Syria nuclear
file - similar to the Iran file - at the UN
Security Council.
Moscow's dilemma is that
it cannot openly explain its side of the US's
geopolitical agenda toward Syria. Any such
explanation will expose the hollowness of the
US-Russia reset, which the Kremlin under President
Dmitry Medvedev assiduously worked for. But
Washington is not going to let Russia off the hook
either. It is certain to tighten the noose around
Assad's neck.
Put simply, the US wants
Russia to leave Syria alone for the West to
tackle. But Russia knows what follows will be that
the Russian naval base there would get shut down
by a pro-Western successor regime in Damascus that
succeeds Assad.
The stakes are very high.
Last year, the deputy head of Russian military
intelligence was killed in mysterious
circumstances while on an inspection tour of the
naval base in Syria. His body was found floating
on the Mediterranean off the Turkish coast. To be
sure, many intelligence agencies are deeply
embroiled in the Syrian broth.
First and
foremost, a regime change in Syria has become
absolutely critical for breaking Israel's regional
isolation. The US-Israeli hope is that the back of
the Hezbollah can be broken only if the regime of
Assad is overthrown in Damascus and the
Syrian-Iranian alliance is ended. Again, a regime
change in Syria will force the Hamas leadership to
vacate Damascus. Hamas chief Khalid Meshaal has
been living in Damascus under Assad's protection
for several years.
All in all, therefore,
any movement on the Israel-Palestine peace process
on Israeli terms will be possible only if the US
and Israel crack the hard Syrian nut. Washington
and Tel Aviv have been trying to persuade Russia
to fall in line and accept "defeat" over Syria.
But Moscow has stuck to its guns. And now by
sending the warship to the Black Sea, US has
signaled that it will make Russia pay a price for
its obduracy and pretensions as a Mediterranean
and Middle Eastern power.
The
parliamentary election result in Turkey ensuring
another term for the ruling "Islamist" party AKP
(Justice and Development Party) significantly
strengthens the US position on Syria. Ankara has
hardened its stance on Assad and has begun openly
criticizing him. A more obtrusive Turkish role in
destabilizing Assad and forcing a regime change in
Damascus can now be expected in the coming weeks.
Ironically, Turkey also controls the Bosphorous
Straits.
By improving ties with Turkey in
the past decade, Moscow had been hoping that
Ankara would gradually move toward an independent
foreign policy. The Kremlin's expectation was that
the two countries could get together and form a
condominium over the Black Sea. But as events
unfold, it is becoming clear that Ankara is
reverting to its earlier priorities as a NATO
country and US's pre-eminent partner in the
region. Ankara cannot be faulted: it made a shrewd
assessment and drew a balance sheet concluding
that its interests are best served by identifying
with the Western move to effect a regime change in
Syria.
Additionally, Ankara finds it
profitable that it identifies with the Saudi
approach to the upheaval in the Middle East. The
wealth Arabs in the oil-rich countries of the
Persian Gulf are willing to send their "green
money" to Turkey. Ankara also shares Saudi
misgivings about Iran's rise as regional power.
In sum, the US is slowly but steadily
getting the upper hand over its agenda of a regime
change in Syria. Whether Moscow will buckle under
this immense pressure and accept a rollback of its
influence in Syria is the big question. Moscow has
threatened to cooperate with Beijing and adopt a
common stance over Syria. But Moscow's ability to
counter the American juggernaut over Syria is
weakening by the day.
The course of events
over Syria will certainly impact profoundly on the
US-Russia reset. The Obama administration seems to
have done its homework and concluded that it is
worth taking that risk for the sake of ensuring
Israel's security. The warship that sailed into
the Black Sea carries a blunt message to Russia to
accept that it is a mere pale shadow of the former
Soviet Union.
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 2011 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
