For those who study the geopolitical chess game, the
presence of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Moscow for a ceremony honoring
Russian fighters who died in World War II was an important move. It was even
more important for preceding the Israeli counterattack against Iranian military
posts in Syria. By implication, Vladimir Putin must have approved—or, at least,
not objected—to the Israeli military action. And, of course, the Iranians saw the public embrace between the two leaders. No wonder they are enraged.
At a time when the American conversation about Russia has
descended into mindless rants, Stephen Bryen’s article about Russia in the
Asia Times stands out for its clarity and cogency.
He opens thusly:
While
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu marched in Moscow with Russian
President Vladimir Putin in the Immortal Regiment in memory of Russian fighters who
died in World War II, Israel was getting ready to retaliate for an Iranian
rocket attack on Israeli military units in the strategically sensitive Golan.
Israel attributed the missile attack to Iran’s al-Quds Force, an elite unit of
Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) operating in Syria.
The Quds
Force reports directly to the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ali Khamenei,
who certainly authorized the Iranian strike and must take full responsibility
for the consequences.
The
first ever incident in which Iran directly attacked Israel territory – with the
launch of 20 missiles – ended in complete failure.
What about the Israeli counterattack? Bryen explains:
Israel responded
to the Iranian attack with a much larger strike of 70 missiles that targeted
Iranian bases, command centers and weapons depots in Syria and Syrian air
defenses around Damascus, and other more forward air defenses on the Syrian
part of the Golan.
According
to Israel’s Defense Ministry, the Syrian air defenses have been battered to the
degree where they are no longer functional and need to be completely rebuilt.
Israel says the retaliatory strike was successful against most of the
Iranian targets but it will take time before a reliable assessment can be
made.
Iran’s
attempt to strike Israel and the powerful response suggests a significant
change is afoot in geostrategic dynamics in the Middle East.
Bryen lists key observations about the ceremony. And, we
ought to know, in an era where everyone thinks he is a mind reader, that the language of public ceremony is more important than speculating
about a political leader’s childhood traumas.
Thus:
Russia was informed by Israel ahead of the attack on
the Iranians, a fact that was officially stated by the Israel Defense Ministry
spokesperson and reported by the Russian press. It is noteworthy that there
were only two foreign visitors to Russia’s 73rd annual Victory Parade and its March of the Immortals: the President of Serbia, Aleksandar Vučić, and Netanyahu.
When
President Putin offered to pin the Ribbon of St. George to their jackets, Vučić refused.
Netanyahu accepted. The Ribbon of St. George is a ribbon of remembrance of the
participants in World War II and also is a nationalist symbol. Netanyahu also
marched with President Putin and, like the nearly one million Russians who
joined the march, carried a placard with a photo and name of a loved one lost
in the World War II conflict.
At the least, this marks a significant victory for Israeli
diplomacy. Also, Netanyahu might serve as an intermediary between Putin and
Trump, helping to produce a rapprochement… even though, given the American
political climate, the best that can currently be hoped for will take place
through intermediaries.
Anyway, the Netanyahu/Putin connection will certainly effect
the balance of power in the Middle East. Bryen continues:
Netanyahu’s
presence in Moscow represents in the strongest possible terms that the two
leaders have achieved an operational modus vivendi, allowing the Israeli and
Russian militaries to work out a deconfliction system for their air forces and air defenses.
Russia has consistently demonstrated its willingness to tolerate attacks by
Israel against shipments of weapons and weapons depots that are either
supporting the Iranians or Hezbollah.
Iran
has to be alarmed that Russia and Israel are working in close collaboration in
Syria. Iran has been pushing to add to the 10 permanent bases it has in Syria and now wants a naval
port, but Assad has refused due to Russian
objections. Israel would certainly object to an Iranian naval presence as
well.
Israel is working diplomatically to counter Iranian
aggression:
Iran’s
strategic objective is to dominate an arc of countries from Iran, through Iraq,
Lebanon and Syria and eventually Jordan as a powerful Shia front that would
form the basis not only for Iran’s expansion but would put huge military
pressure on Israel. Iran already has disproportionate influence in Iraq and has
control of Lebanon through the Hezbollah. But Syria is far more important
because of its proximity to Israel and the many installations Iran has built
there.
The
Russians have been under considerable pressure from Israel to control the Iranians
or push them out. While the latter option is not likely, Iran’s threats to
Saudi Arabia through its missile and nuclear programs, via interventions in
Iraq and support of the Houthis in Yemen (including supplying missiles to the
Houthis that are fired at Saudi Arabia) are very troublesome to the
Russians.
And also, the Russians are concerned about Iranian actions in Yemen:
The
Russian economy only has two bright spots: arms sales, which expands Russia’s
influence and helps bolster Russia’s underfunded military, and oil and gas
exports, with exports to Europe and China significant to Russia’s economic
survival. Consequently, the Russians need to maintain good relations with key
players in the oil and gas market, especially Saudi Arabia. While Iran also is
an oil exporter, it is well below the top 10 exporters.
The
last thing Russia wants is an extended war in Syria that will eat up more of
its resources and send home more Russian casualties, which would be regarded
with considerable negativity on the home front. The restive Russian public is
hungry for domestic economic growth and a reduction in military
confrontations. Putin has already signaled he is going in that
direction and is trying to reduce military expenditures.
Russia has enough problems without trying to rein in an
increasingly irrational Iran. Note Bryen’s analysis:
Syria
is a drain and it will get worse if the Iranians and Hezbollah stir up more
trouble, particularly as ISIS and partners such as al-Nusra are all but
defeated. … For the Russians in Syria, they would like to declare victory (and
Putin tried to once before) but stay. From Russia’s perspective, Iran is an
uncontrollable and increasingly irrational ally, especially the IRGC and the
al-Quds force operating on Syrian territory.
Iran is
dangerously exposed in Syria. Its elite al-Quds fighting force is there and
would have long supply lines to maintain if it gets into an extended conflict
with Israel. If the Russians cannot control the Iranians, Russia might decide
to stand aside and let the Israelis annihilate the al-Quds force and the mercenaries
Iran imported to fight in Syria, to reduce Iranian casualties.
The
Iranians have to be aware that while there is a modus vivendi between Israel
and Russia, it may also be the forthcoming key to a rapprochement between
Washington and Russia. President Donald Trump has changed the dynamics of the
great game by terminating the JCPOA Iran nuclear “arrangement.”
Trump seems to be playing his hand well:
… Trump
is playing a strong international role symbolized by the upcoming meeting
between himself and Kim Jong-un. If even partially successful this will
shift the balance of political support in Trump’s favor and give him a chance,
with Israel’s possible assistance to approach the Russians on a number of major
issues including nuclear arms control, Ukraine and Crimea and challenges to
NATO. Iran could well pay the price if this develops.
So, here’s some much needed perspective on the Middle East,
Syria, Iran, Israel, Putin and Trump. With the American media fixated on Stormy
Daniels, it is good to have analysis that casts light into our mental
darkness.
2 comments:
Perhaps Bibi can convince Putin that allowing Russians to fight with/for the Syrians is a really NOT GOOD decision.
Putin withheld Russian air and diplomatic cover. The Iranians want no other political entity in Syria, Iraq, or Lebanon. The alliance with Russia is ad hoc and exists only for Iranian convenience. Putin did what he did to send a message to Teheran that what he has provided can also be withheld with ease. Iran is overextended and will pay a price.
Bibi in the march was message as clear as a bell that the Mullahs ignored.
PS. As commander of Al-QUDs it is Solimeini that reports directly to the Supreme Ayatollah/
Post a Comment