The Russian Lion
By Sami Koleib, Al Manar
12, December 2013
By Sami Koleib, Al Manar
12, December 2013
The use of the term “Russian Bear” has become commonplace.
This is a term that came from the West, perhaps from Britain. That term was meant to distort the image of
Russia as a state that is associated with harshness and viciousness. Reciprocally, a rosy picture is used to
describe the United States as the “American Dream”. The extent of this comparison, especially during
the Cold War, did not seem to bemuse the Russians much. The Russians themselves adopted the idea to
the extent that they used the bear as their international mascot in sporting
and celebratory arenas. This included the image of a Russian bear playing the balalaika,
an image the Russians and the rest of the world loved.
Ever since the former polished-faced ex KGB Vladimir Putin
took over the reins in his country, a new image emerged. Today he is referred
to as the Master of the Kremlin, transformed into a “lion within the jungle of
the international community”, one who grabs opportunities and gets
them. The image of the President who is an athlete, a musician, a businessman,
an ever-youthful and energetic person, a judo and taekwondo wrestler, despite
him being 62 years old, he has become one who was capable of upsetting the easy slumber
of the White House and NATO.
There is hardly any exaggeration in this description. Putin
has been able to dictate his terms upon the "international jungle", as the
term “international community” would be too kind a description. He has forced NATO to
review its defence shield policy. He
threatened a return to the arms race. He
averted most UNSC resolutions that he did not agree with. Together with China
and other BRICS nations, he decided to change the path of the mono-polarity of
the world. He alluded to establishing a
new international monetary fund which would exchange the USD for a new
currency. He used a speech he gave in 2008 in which he vehemently said that
America needs to treat Russia as an international partner and that the time of
mono-polarity has ended and that the rest of the world does not follow
Washington’s agendas.
In this "international jungle", Putin made his way to the
Middle East resolutely via two avenues; Syria and Iran. He is also capable of getting in via the
Israeli gate as Russia has more than a million Israelis of Russian origin. During the peak of the Syrian crisis, he
visited Tel Aviv and offered his services as the only party that is able to
play the role of mediator between Israel and the countries with which Israel
finds it the most difficult to deal with.
Putin realised that the resilience of the Syrian government
in face of those who wish to topple President Bashar Al Assad would give
Russia more credibility. He never said he was defending Assad, but rather
defending international law. This is an
important stand for him and the image of his country. He can say that he defended a State and
enabled it to remain standing. This gives
more credibility to the Russian role. Others defended the other side and found
themselves having to" go back to the Russian argument that iterates that
military intervention and toppling a government by force would fail and that
the departure of Assad, prior to Geneva II, is not acceptable and that priority needs to be given to fighting terrorism. Together with China, he formed an
international diplomatic shield to protect the Syrian government and followed
that with military hardware, experts and perhaps more.
Certain Western and Arabic States tried to distort the image
of Putin. Some of them claimed that he is supporting a dictatorial regime and
contributing to Syrian bloodshed. Saudi
Arabia said, at some stage, that Russia will lose its interests in the region.
Putin did not move by one inch. It became imperative for the Saudi chief of
intelligence, Bandar, at the end, to go and visit Moscow (to try to negotiate).
Putin takes another step in expanding his sphere of influence. He sends his foreign minister
Sergei Lavrov to Tehran to establish a broad based partnership. The stern Lavrov, just like his President,
says that Russia is determined to broaden and improve its relationships with
Iraq in an attempt to contribute towards stability of that country. Putin affirmed that
Iran is a main player in Geneva II.
A few kilometres away the GCC Summit is held. There is a huge concern. For the first time cracks appear that threaten its unity. The Sultanate of Oman, which
is close to Iran and Syria, takes a stand that is tantamount to mutiny against
the bigger states. The Emirates exile some opponents under the justification of
preventing them from political activities.
Kuwait sends to Damascus indications of openness despite the concerns of
its conservative hawks. All States,
except Qatar, declare an open or covert war to curb the Muslim Brotherhood.
What is new in the GCC Summit is condoning the
Iranian-Western resolution. This is quite pertinent given that it comes only a
few weeks after Saudi Arabia declines to comment on the matter. What is also new here is the unanimous condoning
of the participation of the Syrian National Coalition in Geneva II. This is
more important as this new deal stipulates that Assad remains in power and also comes after the Syrian Army and its allies
are just about to finish taking control of Damascus province after the battle
of Qalamoun. Everything else is well known. To expect more out of this resolution
would be like waiting to hear of another Israeli settler killing a Palestinian
in Jerusalem before the GCC decides that Jerusalem should be the capital of
Palestine.
Putin agrees with America that Iran should not have nuclear
weapons and that
Israel should remain strong. They both
concur on the priority of fighting terrorism which makes it imperative that Arab armies remain strong including the Syrian
Army. This can diminish the westward Islamic expansion. These are the points of agreement between
America and Russia, but their competition is stronger.
Westerners feel the danger of Russian expansion, this is why
the West considers it ok to use Ukraine as a gateway (to hit at Russia). Europe feels driven to support the
opposition. The American Assistant Secretary of
State meets with the Ukrainian opposition.
France tries to sabotage the Western-Iranian nuclear deal, and it
continues to keep good links with Saudi Arabia after it abandoned Qatar in the
hope of upgrading the status of the armed opposition against the Syrian
government. None of this seems to faze
Russia. Putin continues to go from
strength to strength, imposing his own terms.
The time of American military gambles is no longer
viable. Putin realises this. Here enters into the scene the chief of the
Iranian Revolutionary Guard, General Muhammad Ali Jaafari. He ridicules the recent American-Israeli rhetoric
about a military strike about Iran, saying “…any talk about military action
against Iran is ridiculous”
The world changes.
Instead of adopting the traditional American way of invading countries, invasions that are very expensive and without clear, foreseeable outcomes, at a time when America has serious domestic issues, Barack Obama is more in favour of negotiating peaceful agreements. Vladimir Putin seems more credible as he
has been able to achieve a new and serious era that is based on the end of
global unilateralism. The global lion
does not seem to be prepared to back off at any cost. Russians are once again feeling elated by his
enhancement of their national pride. But what will he do with Syria’s lion (Assad)?
Will he continue to support him to the end? This is the determinator. There is a conviction in Damascus that Russia
would not have won its political battle if the Syrian government fell. The most recent
communication between Putin and Assad has partly bolstered this understanding to say the least.
Translated/Interpreted by Ghassan Kadi and Intibah Wakeup.
Original Article:
http://www.almanar.com.lb/
Original Article:
No comments:
Post a Comment