Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

The Embassy

How Putin Lost Syria

Tu-160 bomber about to take off. Image Credit: TASS.
Tu-160 bomber about to take off. Image Credit: TASS.

Just a few years ago, Syria seemed proof that Russia had thrown off its post-Soviet blues. In 2015, the Assad regime – Moscow’s longtime ally in the Middle East – seemed on the brink of defeat by rebels. It was Russian airpower, advisors, special forces and Wagner Group mercenaries – alongside Iranian and Hezbollah fighters– that saved the Syrian government. More than a foreign policy triumph, it seemed a vindication of Putin’s crusade to restore what he saw as the glory of the Soviet empire.

More than 63,000 Russian soldiers served in Syria over the last decade, along with dozens of warplanes that pounded rebel positions as well as terror-bombing cities.

And after all that effort, what did Russia gain? Syrian president Bashar al-Assad is now in exile in Moscow, while the new Islamist government in Damascus has little affection for Russia. Even if the new government allows Russia to keep its prized naval and air bases in Syria, the Russo-Syrian special relationship is no more.

Can Russia Still Project Power? 

How could this have happened? One mistake the Kremlin made was overestimating Russia’s ability to project power overseas, argues Ruslan Pukhov, director of the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies (CAST) think tank in Moscow. 

“Moscow does not have sufficient military forces, resources, influence and authority for effective intervention by force outside the former USSR,” Pukhov wrote in an article for the Russian newspaper Kommersant. “And it can act there, in fact, only with the condescending permission of other strong powers and for as long as they allow it.”

“It is entirely possible to bluff with force and capabilities on the world stage, but it is important not to believe in one’s own bluff too much,” Pukhov warned.

Pukhov also faults Russia for not acting decisively: once it committed troops to Syria, it should have made sure that the Syrian government won the war. Instead, Syria was carved up: the Assad regime ended up reasserting control over two-thirds of the country, while rebel groups such as the Kurds, ISIS and Turkish-backed militants controlled the remainder.

Russian military power in Syria was “ not enough to completely defeat Assad’s opponents, especially in the context of their direct support from other powerful external players (the USA, Turkey, Arab monarchies),” Pukhov wrote. “And both the Russian side and the Syrian regime were forced to agree, in essence, to a compromise division of Syria, which in itself was a deferred defeat for Assad’s supporters.”

“The Assad regime, as a typical Eastern despotism, needed not ‘reforms’ to survive and maintain internal support, but demonstrative dancing over the corpses of its defeated enemies.”

Moscow believed that it could compel the rebels into signing a compromise peace that favored Russia. In Pukhov’s view, this merely gave outside powers – such as the U.S. – a chance to trap Russia in a quagmire. “It is hard to see why other powerful forces should have agreed to a deal on Moscow’s terms, and these wishes naturally ended up being built on sand. On the contrary, the demonstrated limitations of Russia’s military achievements only encouraged Russia’s adversaries to try to take revenge by increasing their involvement and wearing down the Russian side by imposing ever greater costs on it.”

Why Russia Failed in Syria

The result was that Russia strove to maintain a “rotten and ineffective status quo” to prop up the “decaying and delegitimized Assad regime.” But many of those troops eventually had to return home after 2022 to meet the insatiable demands of the Ukraine war

“Sitting on two chairs (not fighting and not leaving) naturally ended in a fall when this status quo was violated by players on the enemy side,” Pukhov wrote.

There were many reasons why the Assad regime collapsed, of which the drain on Russian resources caused by the Ukraine war was only one. The Syrian government was brutal and corrupt, and its army demoralized and brittle.

Su-25. Image Credit: Creative Commons.

Su-25 Frogfoot in operations in Syria. Image Credit: Creative Commons.

Assad relied on support from Iran and its Hezbollah proxy, who did much of the hard fighting against the rebels. But that pillar collapsed after Hezbollah was decimated by Israel, and Iran became desperate to avoid war with the Israelis and Americans. 

After failed wars in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, many Americans could only agree with Pukhov’s assessment of Russia’s Syrian venture. “In the modern world, victory is possible only in a quick and fleeting war. If you win effectively in a matter of days and weeks, but cannot quickly consolidate your success in military and political terms, then ultimately you will lose, no matter what you do.”

About the Author: Michael Peck 

Michael Peck is a defense writer whose work has appeared in Business Insider, Forbes, Defense News, Foreign Policy magazine, and other publications. He holds an MA in political science from Rutgers Univ. Follow him on Twitter and LinkedIn

Written By

Michael Peck is a defense writer whose work has appeared in Business Insider, Forbes, Defense News, Foreign Policy magazine, and other publications. He holds an MA in political science from Rutgers Univ. Follow him on Twitter and LinkedIn

5 Comments

5 Comments

  1. megiddo

    January 14, 2025 at 5:25 pm

    There was never any real way putin could have saved syria from the gang of vultures.

    Right from the very beginning hillary Clinton warned bashar al-assad about his ties to iran.

    That was the cue for Mr erdogan to put together his plan to shape the future of syria. Erdogan himself definitely having zero love for the kurds in the border regions as well as those shiites holding reign in tehran.

    Turkey with backing from the CIA and gulf arab states channeled arms and fighters to northern syria, including ISIS fighters, to stir up trouble.

    What did vice-president joe biden say in early october 2014.

    He said turkey was in cahoots with jihadist extremists.

    “The turks, saudis, emiratis were so determined to take down assad and essentially have a proxy sunni-shia war.”

    An intensely incensed erdogan immediately shot back.

    Take back your words or else.

    No way putin could have saved syria from the vultures. No way at all.

  2. N0N0

    January 14, 2025 at 6:18 pm

    Russia’s present difficulty in Ukraine is somebody else’s opportunity somewhere else.

  3. Commentar

    January 14, 2025 at 8:10 pm

    Russia only began helping syria on the last day of sept 2015.

    But long before that, many years before that, in feb 2010 on the eve of the ‘arab spring’ or arab tumult, hillary Clinton warned syria to MOVE AWAY from iran.

    Of course that shrill midday neocon warning wasn’t heeded.

    That was most unwise as in 2012 a hillary email stated that to help the ‘civil war in syria’ the US and allies MUST use direct force against assad.

    In 2016, a leaked document showed hillary herself confirmed that the hussein obama administration had deliberately provoked the 2011 ‘civil war in syria’ as it was seen as the best way to assist Israel.

    Thus syria all along was fighting against totally insurmountable odds, fighting against the very most powerful forces on the planet.

    That syria was able to survive from 2011 to december 2024, an agonisingly long period of 13 years, is a testament to its inherent strength.

    Ultimately, with turkey as its neighbor, even syria’s inherent strength wasn’t enough.

  4. George

    January 15, 2025 at 3:19 pm

    but you now own the aftermath, not them. Enjoy!

  5. James Jeffrey

    January 15, 2025 at 5:00 pm

    Peck summarizes nicely the “create a quagmire” for Russia (and Iran) in Syria which Mike Pompeo tasked us to implement in mid-2018 based on ideas John Kerry had espoused but President Obama did not endorse. Biden administration despite strategic confusion and attempts to shift to a more pro-Assad policy unenthusiastically but effectively enough continued the Trump-Pompeo policy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Advertisement