Russia's Strategy in Middle East: Attributes， Background and Prospects

FEnG SHAoLEI

Professor， PhD Supervisor， Dean of School of Advanced International and Area Studies and Director of Center for Russian Studies，East China Normal University

Russia's Strategy in Middle East: Attributes， Background and Prospects

FEnG SHAoLEI

Professor， PhD Supervisor， Dean of School of Advanced International and Area Studies and Director of Center for Russian Studies，East China Normal University

Russian President Vladimir Putin held the 2015 large-scale press conference on December 17. At the three-hour-seven-minute press conference， Putin fielded 40-plus questions concerning Russian economy， combat against the extremist organizations and Russia-Turkey relationship from 32 journalists of Russia and beyond.

Over the years， the US and Europe have contributed to a series of regime changes in the name of“revolutions” in the Middle East，North Africa and former Soviet Union， which leads to aftershocks of revolution emerging from time to time. Against this background，Russia enters a new phase of allround adjustment of its strategy in the Middle East based on years of reflection and planning. It endeavors to leverage its traditional advantages to break the dominion of the US and some European countries in the Middle East through proactive deployment， with a view of winning strategic space by adopting flexible stances.

ATTRIBUTE I: LAUncHInG PREEMPTIVE ATTAcks In SYRIAn WAR

During the first phase of the Syrian war after its outbreak in 2011， Russia remained observant and cautious on the whole. It was after the fall of 2013 that Russia showed crucial changes in its stance. Firstly， Russia employed the clever conception of turning war into peace， which not only forestalled the possible attack of western countries on the Syrian government forces and won Syria valuable peace for a period of time，but also won acclaim of the international com-munity. Two years later， while Assad's regime once again became crisis-ridden， Russia cracked down on the “Islamic State” forces within the territory of Syria through careful deployment of air and naval forces on September 29， 2015. Once again， Russia reversed the Syrian war situation and attracted a lot of attention of the international community.

The changes in Russian strategy in the area seen against the context of the Syrian war's evolution clearly show that preemptive attacks constitute a dominant attribute of the Putinled Russian strategy.

During the year since the US began to build a coalition to combat the“Islamic State”， the “Islamic State”occupied an expanding rather than a diminishing area. In September， 2014，Chairman Dempsey of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff announced that the US would provide USD500 million to train 15，000 armed troops for the Syrian rebel army. However， according to BBC， after the start of the training program， a large quantity of the weapons have been seized away by the “Islamic State”， and as few as four to five“moderate opposition” people trained by the US remain fighting in Syria. Evidently， the US anti-terror deployment in Syria stretched thin， which reflected the Obama Administration wanted to maintain its influence in the Middle East， but was in a rush to end its dilemma in that area. Therefore， it is reasonable and well-timed for Russia to have waged military attacks when the Syrian war came to such a state.

At the 2015 Valdai Conference， Putin bluntly condemned the US double standards for the anti-terror coalition，“Don't play on words and divide the terrorists into the moderate and the non-moderate. If they wish to take some of the terrorists as the battering arm to overthrow the legitimate government and deal with these terrorists afterwards， like persuading them to give up the regime， it's purely their wishful thinking. Libya today is a typical example”.

For quite a time， the western public opinion and Russian liberals all played it up that Putin intended to lead the extremist forces in his country and Middle Asia to Syria， believing Putin combated the “Islamic State” out of consideration for his country's circumstances. However， compared with such presumption， Putin's own explanation is more straightforward. He said， “Over 2，0000 armed troops of the former Soviet Union are in Syria. We face the risk of their return. So we'd rather assist Bashar in fighting them in Syria than have them return”.

It deserves attention that the Russian strategic arrangement of taking the initiative to attack did not take place without prior communication and political negotiation. Since sometime between August and September of 2015， the western media keep reporting that Russia is deploying troops to wage a military attack upon Syria. As a symbolic move， the Russia-America hotline that had been suspended due to Ukraine Crisis was restored. Ever though the Russian side had informed the US of relevant goings-on before the air strikes， the US side still holds grumbles against Russia. All in all，however， Russia took preemptive measures in the Syrian war， but it did not dodge justifying its position to related parties.

The statistics shows by the end of 2015， Russian warplanes conducted over 2，000 sorties， killed hundreds of gunmen， ruined nearly 3，000 facilities，and occupied 40% of the infrastructure of the “Islamic State”. The result is significant for thwarting the expansion of the “Islamic State” and ending the unfavorable anti-terror situation in the Middle East. Moreover， it paves way for adjusting the relationships among big powers.

ATTRIBUTE II: ALL-RoUnDLY FoRGInG ALLIAnc-Es AT MULTI-LEVELs To ADVAncE MILITARY CooPERATIon

Two days before Russia launched air strikes upon the “Islamic State” within the territory of Syria， Russia， Iran， Iraq and Syria announced that they decided to reach an agreement on shared information security to combat the armed forces of the “Islamic State” and stop its advancement.

The key to the wartime cooperation among the four countries is the central role played by the Russia-Iran cooperation. Regarding the Syrian issue， quite some big powers play a role. Among them， the three countries of the US， Russia and Iran are the most important. And among the three， Russia and Iran are most likely to develop close partnership. Since the 1990s， the two countries have been carrying out in-depth economic cooperation in multiple aspects and they both recognize the actual effect of the “sphere of influence”， uphold the governance mode for stabilizing the domestic politics，and regard Bashar Regime as their close partner in Syria， which contributes to close cooperation between the two countries. In October 2015， Iranian nuclear agreement was signed， which doubtless opened the door for further cooperation between the two countries. It goes without saying that Russia cooperates with Syria. Moreover， at the critical juncture， Iraq opened， despite the pressure from the US， its airspace to Russian transit fighters and had the information exchange headquarters of the four countries set up on its territory， which manifested the close cooperation among the four countries.

Some people hold the cooperation among Russia， Iran， Iraq and Syria is essentially an alliance between Russia and the Shia in the Middle East. However， Putin articulately announced，“We never treat the Shia and Sunni separately. We will never involve ourselves in the sectarian conflicts of Syria”. Moreover， speaking from Russia's diplomacy practice in the Middle East， it always upholds the important principle of transcending the sectarian conflicts to build partnerships. The growing relationship between Russia and Sunni-dominated Egypt is a case in point. Additionally， the personal contact between Russian President Putin and Egyptian President Ceci， the close economic and military cooperation between Russia and Egypt， and their respective political aspirations fordomestic stability all lay down a solid foundation for the bilateral relationship.

If the cooperation among the four countries is at the core of Russia's strategy in the Middle East， Russia striking up many alliances in the central and northeastern Africa as well as the surrounding areas is a major sideline in the Syrian war. It not only refers to Russia's contact with its traditional friends like Greece and Cyprus， which two showed political support for Russia after the Russia-Turkey warplane incident， but also involves the statussensitive countries like Israel. Considering Israel wishes to maintain stability along the Syria-Israel border and especially Netanyahu wishes to break the isolation Israel is stuck in after the signing of the Iran nuclear agreement，Russia maintains contacts with Israel at all levels. According to the Russian expert Angela Stein， in the second half of 2015 alone， the state leaders of Egypt， Israel， Jordan， Kuwait， Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates all visited Russia， and many of them signed arms agreements with Russia. In particular， Saudi Arabia decided to invest a fund of USD10 billion in Russia to foster agricultural cooperation between the two countries.

The western camp also showed changes after the Russian air strikes. The Paris attacks and Russian passenger plane's crash in Sinai Peninsula triggered cooperation between Russia and France. The Le Point dated November 18 reports NATO Secretarygeneral Stoltenberg welcomes Russia to join in the process as Russia can play a constructive role in Syria. As for the US， the Obama Administration had called for the international community to isolate Russia and now it has to cooperate with Russia on the Syrian issue， which means Russia has achieved substantial results in striking up alliances in the Middle East.

ATTRIBUTE III: LEVERAGInG THE BIG PoWER's SPAcE ADVAnTAGE To EMPLoY THE STRATEGY oF “BEsIEGInG WEI To REscUE ZHAo”

Russia waged attacks against the “Islamic State” in Syria. Geographically speaking， Russia tried to help with the Ukraine Crisis in a way comparable to besieging Wei to rescue Zhao. Holistically， Russia made a deliberate show of its strength， revealing to the US its intention to defend its strategic space.

Though Russia is inferior to the West in terms of overall strength， but Russia's new weapons and strategic strength displayed in the Syrian battlefield gave the Western countries a big shock. Russia launched middle-range cruise missiles from the Caspian Sea，which precisely hit a series of targets of the “Islamic State” and greatly deterred the otherwise arrogant terrorists. This is telling evidence. On March 15， 2016， Russia abruptly announced the withdrawal of major troops from Syria， which stirred up another big wave of international public opinion. On the one hand， Russia's withdrawal of troops is conducive to promoting peace talks in Geneva； Russia quits military operation promptly so as to avoid repeating the tragedy on the Afghanistan battlefield. On the other hand， despite the Russian withdrawal of troops， Russia still holds its military base and the military advisor still plays an important role. The armaments reinforcement will come at a call. Therefore， the Syrian government force supported by Russia still poses pressure to the “Islamic State” and the terrorists， as evidenced by the Syrian government troops conquering the strategic town of Suwayda.

With regard to the Ukraine Issue，since the ceasefire between the government force and local armed troops in east Ukraine， both sides have withdrawn a batch of their heavy weapons. Afterwards the eastern area of Ukraine began to calm down， but not without the aftermath of crises. The war situation in Ukraine has eased up， which far from means the overall situation in the country has turned good. In view of the increasingly complex domestic situation in Ukraine， the western big powers' support for Ukraine will not be withdrawn within a short time. And Russia's protection of and stalwart support for the armed force and pro-Russian residents in east Ukraine are also likely to continue. Therefore， it seems it will take more time to address the Ukraine crisis and it is even possible that conflicts of uncertain scale will break out from time to time. Against this background， compared with Russia being stuck in a standstill with the West over the Ukraine Issue， it is better for Russia to continue to mediate with the western countries in Syria where it can give full play to its influences and especially its reserves and advantages in military security， and to open up a new ground in Syria. As thus， Russia attains many interests for itself and defends its allies.

On the whole， though Russia has achieved a lot in this process， the Russian elite decision-makers have yet to face a lot of severe challenges. For one thing， Putin had expected to spend three to four months on air strikes in the “Islamic State”， but actually the air strikes of so long have yet to end the deadlock in Syrian war； and to eliminate the “Islamic State”， ground warfare is inevitable. Whether Russia will maintain its striking momentum or mobilize local forces to ensure win is worth further observation. For another，since Russia's implementation of the new Middle East strategy and especially the rarely seen large-scale deployment of forces in the Middle East after the Cold War， Russia has opened up the situation in the area， broken the myth of the dominance by the US and western countries， and manifested Russia's strength and determination to win. But meanwhile， it boosts cohesion of forces among the western countries，which are ready to confront Russia in an all-round way. While a large-scale confrontation is likely to occur， whether both sides have made thorough consideration for relevant notions and material strength， and whether they are ready to fight it out or have another way out is more of an inevitable issue which deserves concern and contemplation of all parties.