Now Russia is active in Syria, does it have aspirations for Iraq as well?

What the Arabic press says about Russia's role in Syria's war

Russian military support crew attach a satellite guided bomb to SU-34 jet fighter at Hmeimim airbase in Syria. Alexander Kots / AAP Photo

For months, the Kremlin has been steadily marching towards Syria and Iraq, with the pace quickening since the Iran nuclear deal that lifted the heavy sanctions against Tehran, Abdulrahman Al Rashed wrote in the pan-Arab daily Asharq Al Awsat.

These regional developments have showcased the scale of Russia’s and Iran’s military presence in the two countries, he said. While Moscow had repeatedly claimed that the successive shipments of Russian weapons to Syria were purchases from the Assad regime, it had to come clean when the news emerged a few weeks ago that the shipments were for its troops on the ground.

This coincided with a surge in applications from the Russian air force for airspace permits to Syria, implying that Moscow was indeed transporting ammunition for its troops in Syria.

“It was too big an elephant to ignore or deny. Russia had to admit to sending its troops to fight alongside the Syrian government against ISIL and other terrorists,” he said.

But he claimed it didn’t stop there. It was also revealed that Russian intelligence has opened a bureau in the heart of the Iraqi capital, opposite the defence ministry in the Green Zone.

Still reeling from their initial shock at Russia’s full-fledged presence in Syria, the Americans were outraged. They have been openly betrayed by their Iraqi allies who allowed the Russians to operate in an area of US strategic power. To justify their betrayal, the Iraqis claimed they had agreed to share their intelligence on ISIL with the Iranian and Russian governments.

“For the past two years, the White House showed little interest in Syria, which doesn’t hold much strategic value for them. This shows that the current US administration hasn’t learnt the lesson that the George W Bush administration learnt so late: not only is Syria the main source of threat to Iraq, but it was the reason for its defeat,” he wrote.

“Syria was the assembly point for Al Qaeda militants and the so-called Iraqi resistance. It had been providing them safe passage to Iraq since 2004.”

Experience has proved that Iraq can’t be ruled unless the Syrian side was kept in check. This is why the Iranians are fighting in Syria. They are well aware that anyone who rules Damascus wields power to threaten or protect Baghdad.

“The Russians waited to move into Syria first and then Iraq until their Iranian ally was out of the box once the sanctions were lifted. The Iranians fooled the US negotiators into believing that halting their already faltering nuclear programme was worth all these western concessions, including turning a blind eye to their activity and interference in Iraq and Syria,” he noted. The Russians, for their part, decided to move forward quickly and entrench their presence in Iraq.

“Neither Iran or Russia care much about the humanitarian plight of the Syrian and Iraqi people. Their main objective is to strengthen Al Assad’s rule and to complete their control of Iraq,” he concluded.

Columnist Majed Al Samerraei addressed the same topic in the London-based daily Al Arab, saying that the news about a joint intelligence cell involving Iraq, Russia, Iran and Syria does not necessarily imply that Russia has any intentions to carry out a military operation in Iraq.

“It is unlikely that Russia would initiate any military action in Iraq in parallel with its military interference in Syria,” he predicted.

“Recent political and military facts show that Russia, since the Soviet era, was never loyal to the people of this region, namely the Iraqi people. It only sought to bolster its interests, because for years it had the lion’s share in military armament and oil-related projects there.”

Moscow played an important role in Iraq’s disintegration when it didn’t object to the decision to invade it at the behest of the senior Bush administration, and later when it stood watching as US troops marched into Iraq in 2003.

Barack Obama’s hesitant and ambiguous policies towards Syria and Iraq have led to a terrible vacuum, he asserted. It led to the rise of terrorism, extremism and sectarianism in both countries, which the Russian-Iranian alliance was quick to exploit, disseminating the notion that only the Assad regime could rid Syria of ISIL and other terrorist groups and that the sectarian system and the spread of armed militias are Iraq’s only defence against Baathists and ISIL.

The Iranians have no need for a partner in Iraq. Their firm grip on the sectarian system there is all they need to monopolise their power comfortably.

“Iran will not allow Russia a stake in power in Iraq. And president Putin doesn’t need Iraqi blood on his hands,” he added.

Translated by Racha Makarem