Friday 24 February 2017 - 11:54
Story Code : 252400
Syrian Peace Settlement: What choice Moscow, Iran are to face in the region
The Moscow-Ankara-Tehran alliance onthe settlement ofthe Syrian conflict has already brought certain success: the three countries have acted asguarantors ofthe full-scale ceasefire inthe war-torn country and have launched negotiations inAstana aimed tocomplement the Geneva format.
Russian political analysts, however, have drawn attention tothe paradoxical nature ofthe alliance and provided their reasons why the three allies might start experiencing difficulty soon.
The Russian online newspaper Gazeta.ru has interviewed a number ofRussian experts, who first ofall pointed tothe bilateral relations betweenRussia and Iran, noting that not everything goes smoothly betweenthe two countries.
"The basic problem inthe bilateral relationship betweenthe two countries is that no matter what compromise is reached inthe Syrian conflict, Iran is going tolose fromit," the newspaper says.
Leonid Isaev, an expert inMiddle Eastern affairs atMoscow's Higher School ofEconomics pointed outthat when Russia was limited only toabstract declarations onthe developments inthe Middle East, Russia and Iran were onthe same side inthe conflicts, asthere was nothing todivide.
Their positions were similarly aligned duringthe US intervention inIraq, the international campaign inLibya and duringthe Saudi intervention inYemen.
However Moscow and Tehran, he said, are going tofind themselves onopposite sides ofthe barricades assoon asIran's interests inSyria are entrenched upon.
"If we take intoconsideration that the Syrian conflict is going tobe resolved bya division ofthe spheres ofinfluence, and everything seems tobe heading towardsthat, the former allies will become adversaries," he told the newspaper.
Americans will get the territories which are currently underKurdish control, he suggested. The Turks will get Idlib and the north ofAleppo province. Russia's sphere ofinterest will include Damascus and the territories underSyrian government control, he said. And inthis sense, Iran is Moscow's main rival because it has designs onthe same area.
Isaev also noted that even though the new US administration does not have a clear strategy forthe Middle East so far, it has nevertheless indicated some key principles it is going topursue.
One ofthem is that forthe Trump administration, Iran represents one ofthe key threats inthe region.
"The characteristic feature ofObama's policy inthe Middle East was that its main enemy inthe region was not Iran, asit was forthe previous administration ofGeorge W Bush, butthe terrorists ofthe Islamic State (Daesh). Obama made it clear forevery player inthe region that he was interested incooperation if it was againstDaesh," he said.
However, now Russia seems tobe facing a choice. Trump says that he is ready tocooperate withRussia onsecurity issues. But he means not only Daesh here, butIran aswell, regardless all ofhis electoral promises that his alliance withMoscow will be aimed againstterrorist organizations, Isaev said. Moscow will be forced tomake its choice.
Iranian president Hassan Rouhani is slated tovisit Moscow inMarch. Hence Leonid Isaev suggests that the Syrian issue is going totop the agenda ofhis negotiations withPresident Putin.
"In fact, we see two suggestions here. One is fromWashington and another fromTehran. Russia is facing a very difficult choice here. The first option is that we start a Russian-American reset, however whether it is going tobe a success still remains unclear. The same goes forhow it applies toUkraine and other conflict zones. Even though it is still a possibility," he said.
Another option is tostay withIran, the analyst said. Then Moscow should understand that inthis case neither US officials nor even Trump himself will cooperate withit, he concluded.
# Tags
