Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Russia deploying warships in Syria

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Russia deploying warships in Syria

    Russia deploying warships in Syria

    By M K Bhadrakumar – November 28, 2011

    Russia is deploying warships at its base in Syria. The battle group includes aircraft carrying missile cruiser Admiral Kuznetsov. The deployment is being projected as pre-planned and having no relation to the current tensions in Syria, but it follows the US move to station the George H.W. Bush Carrier Strike Group with support vessels off Syria. Speculation is mounting about a western ‘humanitarian intervention’ in Syria.
    US and Turkey have asked their nationals to leave Syria. Arab League is linking up with European Union on Syria. France is taking the leadership once again. Interestingly, Turkey has been invited specially to the EU foreign ministers’ meeting in Brussels. The moves look strikingly similar to the Libyan intervention. The Russian MFA spokesman said on Friday, “The human rights situation in a particular country may certainly be the subject of international concern, but human rights issues under no conditions should be used as a pretext for interfering in the internal affairs of states, in this case Syria. The Syrian people must decide their own fate, without ‘tips from outside. We absolutely do not accept a scenario of military intervention in Syria.“ There have been unconfirmed reports that Russian military advisors may be helping Syria to set up advanced S-300 missiles, which will make it extremely risky for the West to impose a ‘no-fly zone’ as it did in Libya.
    The big question is whether there could be a US-Russia showdown over Syria. For US, regime change in Syria opens the road to taking on Hamas and Hezbollah next, which would isolate Iran. The stakes are very high. For Russia, loss of the Tartus naval base will be a serious blow that will cripple its capability to operate in the Mediterranean region, apart from Syria being an old ally. A US-Russia showdown over Russia can have implications for a host of other issues - Afghan endgame, Iran nuclear problem, US-Pakistan tensions, etc.
    Significantly, Kremlin is deputing Russia’s ambassador to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin to Beijing and Tehran for consultations over the US/NATO missile defence system. Russia has been focusing on the ABM as a bilateral problem so far with US. Now, commonality of interests is being explored with China and Iran. The implications are profound for the regional security in Central and South Asia as well as the Far East.
    To be sure, India’s ‘Act East’ policies - US-India-Japan ‘trilateral dialogue’ in particular - are in Russia’s sights too, as much as China’s. The ‘time-tested’ Russian-Indian cooperation seems to be heading for testy times even as India harmonises with the US’s Asia-Pacific strategy. PM Manmohan Singh’s forthcoming Moscow summit will throw light on the fault lines.



    Posted in Politics.
    Tagged with Missile Defence, Russia-India, Syria, Tartus, US-India.

  • #2
    Foreign intervention will create further instability in the region. This move by Russia may prevent a Western war on Syria, but it appears that many nations are funneling arms to the Syrian resistance. Syrian resistance may eventually take power, but US/Western intervention seeks to actually suppress the Syrian resistances objectives of setting up a free and independent state. A free Syria is not in Israel's interest despite their dislike for Assad. The end result of all of this will be a Sharia governed Syria.

    Some few points on Assad. He has been cooperating with the US on the rendition program, allowing many "terrorist suspects" to be detained and tortured in Syria at what is termed "black sites."

    He is a staunch secularist and has been oppressing his people for years. He has also committed flagrant human rights violations. In regards to foreign policy, he supports groups such as Hamas in Palestine, and Hezbollah in Lebanon against Israel. This is why the West has been against the Assad government for a long time.The Muslim Brotherhood, while banned in Syria, has a strong underground following, especially in the city of Hama which has a history of uprising in the past. The Syrian army defectors that make up the bulk of the Syrian resistance are mostly all Sunni Muslims who were kept at lower ranks of the army. A major part of the Syrian army that is most loyal to Assad are Alawites (Alawites are heretics). The West have tried to exploit these differences for their purposes. Saudi Arabia as well as the GCC and Arab League have also followed suit, and that is why they are on the same page as the West in regards to having a war with Syria. The Alawites control the government, and therefore have the most power in the country. The Assad family obviously are Alawite. It is very complex..

    The "Arab League" and "GCC" have been very hypocritical, while they are hailing the Syrian uprising, they are opposed to the Bahraini and Yemeni uprising.

    Iran on the other hand is opposed to the Syrian uprising, and is championing the Bahraini, Yemeni, and all other regional uprisings that dont go against their interest. The reason for this inconsistency is obviously the Sunni-Shiite rift, but that is all superficial- the actual reason is trade relations.
    Last edited by Guest; 11-29-2011, 03:08 AM.

    Comment

    Working...
    X