Russian Foreign Policy in the Middle East

Kremlin denies firing on Israeli warplane in Syria

The Spokesperson for the Kremlin, Dmitry Peskov, issued a statement on Friday, denying that the Russian forces opened fire on an Israeli warplane inside Syria.

When asked about the reports from the Israeli media regarding the alleged confrontation, Peskov responded: “in this case, Israeli press reports are far from reality.”

The Israeli publication, Yedioth Ahronoth, alleges that the Russian forces have fired at Israeli warplanes on a number of occasions this year; however, these reports are all speculation.

According to Yedioth Ahronoth, Israeli President Reuven Rivlin brought up these allegations during his visit to Moscow on March 15th.

At the time, Putin responded that he was unaware of the incidents, Yedioth said.

Source

I hope that this is just a statement though!

Jesus, not this again, how many times have we caught Israeli Yellow Press (pun intended) red handed inventing third dimensions...

George1 wrote:This is a CIA old report from 80s about USSR's goals in Middle East and its relations with various states.
Although its from a foreign perspective it is interesting to compare the background of USSR/Russia relations with M.East states from the past to present.

https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/DOC_0000499549.pdf

Russian policy defines 3 areas

1. Middle East the non-arab countries of Iran and Turkey
2. Near East the countries of Levant, Iraq, Egypt and Arabian Peninsula and
3. North Afircan countries of Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Libya

Soviet Policy goals were:
1. Blocking any US-sponsored Arab-Israeli peace settlement that leaves Moscow out and optimally, regaining a voice in the peace process
2. Unifying the Arabs into a pro-Soviet front ending the isolation of USSR's allied states of Syria, S.Yemen and Libya
3. Stemming the drift of Algeria and Iraq towards on lesser dependence with Soviet Union and to closer ties with the US
4. Expanding influence in Egypt and Iran. Two important regional targets
5. Eroding Turkey's security ties with the United States

Lets compare that goals then with today's background
1. Russia is part of Middle East quartet. The group was established in in 2002, as a result of the escalating conflict in the Middle East.
2. Russia's allied states today can be considered Syria and Iran after 90s. Libya is lost and Yemen is in unstable situation years now
3. Algeria and Iraq have made big arms deals with Russia today and have much more dependence for arms on Russia than on US. From the other hand the have close economic relations with USA.
4. This goal has been almost fully achieved, since Iran is a Russian ally in region and Egypt has moved to closer ties with Moscow last years after General Sisi takeover of power. Economic deals, arms deals, joint military exercises have balanced previous decades of US influence
5. Turkeys security ties are eroding to US because of Erdogan's policies and not because of Russia'a actions. We will see how this will be evoluted

Very interesting. Considering today's background, I think some positives and negatives to be taken on board from the current situation.

1. The quartet is effectively dead, as any Palestinian peace deal looks miles away. I think Russia's efforts here would be best spent trying to get Hamas and Fatah to present a united front, and providing meaningful economic development assistance, so that in the event of a settlement in the future, Russia could have a new ally based on genuine historical ties and support. It's an investment in the future.

2. Aiding civilians in Yemen to preserve a valuable ally could be helpful here. Russian interests would be strengthened considerably by having the goodwill of the population, and would be a strong gesture. More robustly, Russia could support the Houthi government factions with defensive weaponry and general logistical equipment (i.e. anti-aircraft weapons to resist Saudi airstrikes, APCs etc). Russia really does need to regain some traction Yemen.

3. This has been some of the most positive developments of the last few years. Especially with Algeria, Russia needs to work hard to both broaden and deepen this progress into general economic and geo-political alliance. A strategic ally in the Western Mediterranean would be a significant step forward. Russia's energy sector expertise could be really utilised here to great mutual benefit.

4. Iran is now a solid ally, but Egypt needs careful diplomacy to really make an impact. I'd be cautious to celebrate too early.

5. For Russia, Turkey is the best news she's had in a long time. Keep at the good work at loosing friends and alienating people, Erdogan... Sometimes, your enemies really do just start hitting themselves repeatedly in the face while you just sit there and watch. Now is one of those times.

Why did the non capitalist road to development fail Iin Afghanistan ? Here it is important to correctly identify the actual stage in social and human development . No matter how much you shout at Afghan to unite . By ideology or loudspeaker . They can not practically make a move in that direction . They can not form a nation . Since there is lack of economic development . And lack of an important class . The national bourgeoisie . So clothes do not make a man . The long term solution for the region is economic development . Investment in a directed and intelligent way . In diverse communities . That enable the melding together . Formation of national identity . The yanks only want to promote the narrow interests of a few multinationals . So for them economic development runs counter to their interests . Choosing instead to promote rule by the few . Who can be bribed cheaply . Hence no effort by them to invest in Afghanistan . The way Russians can succeed . Is to correctly identify the stage of national development . And help it along . By investment . Once they build the man . He will afford to wear the right clothes .

I tend to agree... so many Afghans probably can't remember what peace is, let alone law and order.

When you have nothing then you have nothing to lose.

Well said . It is difficult sometimes to overcome one's own political or ideological or ethnic biases . But material ownership allows a new level of politics . We may rightly feel bad about some aspect of another man's culture or politics . But by economic stiching or sewing together to create industrial sites or zones that use local raw materials and labour and produce goods locally . Then we build nations . Once the door is closed to the house . And thieves can not get in . Then a family can form and children feel safe . But again the husband could be beating his wife ! But that is a lesser of the evils . And a job for a marriage councillor !

Once you have peace and stability then you can properly educate.

Even so called civilised sophisticated and liberated western women put up with domestic abuse... because he is sorry and he actually loves me really and he said he wont do it again...

Sometimes people make mistakes and think they have to keep living with those mistakes rather than changing their situation.

The west is wrong... there is no one path of civilisation and the west is certainly not the peak of evolution.

Personally I think people are too full of their rights and not respectful of their responsibilities.

I think the justice system in the west is broken... it is about winning and losing... it should be about justice for the victim and the guilty.

A lawyer who gets a guilty person off should be disbarred.

We forget that when nation building however... they must all be reproductions in our image... Britain did that with its colonies 2 hundred years ago and its colonies continue... like Australia in New Guinea and Indonesia... and the US everywhere.

It is a little difficult to find the way forward . Different ideas all have predictive elements . Monotheistic religions talk of an eternal battle of good versus evil . Ending in a cataclysmic event . When all evil is eradicated . Social thinkers predict a world free of exploitation . Others predict a world of wealth and plenty . I predict the collapse of human civilization . Different people have different ideas . And these ideas change . As do their political ideas . Different people come to power .

In this modern world . Today's friends can turn into tomorrow's foes . But how does this affect or should affect a considered and logical stand in foreign policy . How should one act in peace and war ? This assumes that human society is separate from natural law . And it can create it's own laws . Or have it's own ideas .

I tend to think that the world exists within natural laws . That govern not only the atoms . But human society as well . But I think that we have not yet discovered these laws . And understood them properly . Despite theories by evolutionists and creationists . And since we do not live in accordance with natural laws . We face extinction . Perhaps our big brains , instead of being an evolutionary spike . Is in fact an evolutionary dead end . Like the big antlers of giant deer . That lead to it's demise . In fact creationist thinkers attribute our expulsion from paradise , to having knowledge . Or a big brain . So the two seem to be in agreement !

So in nature there are no harmful relationships . Although humans wrongly attribute their actions to animals .or they anthromorphize them . So in this way we have to maintain beneficial relationships . This may have more to do with our instincts than our intellect . That reduces and abstracts the real world .

George1 wrote:
In Egypt, after the signing of major contracts for the purchase of arms in 2015 of 5 billion euros and the modernization of the local defense industry companies, Russia is negotiating on granting of Egyptian military bases, primarily naval and air base at Sidi Barrani.

Has Egypt expressed interest in the T-50 or Armata?

Russian support of Marshal Haftar, which was discussed during the "meeting of the sea", against the government of national unity, expressed in the ongoing negotiations for the purchase of arms worth about 1.5 billion euros (combat aircraft, tanks, air defense systems), as well as proposals for reform of the Libyan army.

So Haftar or Hifter, has the money of eastern Libya? Russia-Libya and Russia-Egypt relations are beginning to resemble, or revert to, those of the cold war.

Why do humans do wrong to each other ? Is it that they are sinful from birth ? Or misguided throughout life ? Or that their propensity to do wrong is accentuated by circumstance ? Are some humans sinless from birth ? Their souls uncorruptable through life , by circumstance ? Or that all humans exist in relative cognitive dissonance . Circumstance then alleviating this condition . I believe the latter .

Circumstances of the industrial revolution in Europe . Led Europeans and their dissendents into the false narrative of their supremacy in the world against all other races . They will try to maintain this advantageous position at any cost . Discarding the reality of the changing world . The British for instance will spend billions on nuclear weapons . While at home their people lack basic medical care , food and housing . Abroad they still support absolute rulers , dictators , who will act against the interests of local people . Against their democratic rights . Against national development . Independence .

This includes national defence . They will not allow industrial growth . National defence industries . As the proverb goes " give a man a fish and you feed him for a day . Teach him how to fish and you feed him for life " . That is where Russia and China and Iran can overtake and exceed them . By encouraging national development . Selling weapons is not the solution for these nations . Making weapons is better solution . Why should all these countries not make the means to defend themselves ? So that they can be truly independent of western imperialism ?

George1 wrote:
A very difficult rapprochement between Russia and Israel on the Syrian dossier occurs after the Russian authorities began taking measures to make it difficult for Hezbollah to have a presence on Syrian territory.

Why? Where would Assad be without Hez? Didn't they just help regain Aleppo for him?

Russia Chief Staff Gen Gerasimov met Iran chief Staff Gen Bagheri, Tehran باقری با ژنرال گراسیموف

Are any of the world's democracies truly representational of their populations ? I believe that a parliament should be like a mirror to society . That the law should guarantee this . Irrespective of the existence of the number or type of political parties . In case of single party states , then this party being national in character , must include all citizens by religion and ethnicity and economic class or profession . This I think is the system operational in Syria now .

A transition to multi-party democracy can happen , even if these new political parties are regional . However the membership and constituents they present to parliament must be a mirror or reflective of the regions they operate in . So a political party that operates in northern Syria , may have to have a percentage of kurd and turkoman members for parliament . And these must also reflect by their profession , the economic make up of the area . They may therefore have to be mostly farmers with a small percentage of workers etc.

In this way the big mirror of parliament is made up of several smaller mirrors put together by political parties This system is more suited to countries that are decentralised and not homogeneous . However for countries that are more developed and homogeneous . Then national parties are possible and better . But still to maintain proportionality , the ingredients of these parties must be reflective of the population .

The best system , I think is one based on economic class . You need about four political parties . All national . Representing each class by numbers . But you can still insure that these parties are themselves representational along religious and ethnic lines . Here the supremacy is economics . The most immediate concern for most and the nation .

I don't think that there are any perfect or ideal democracies in the world today . The British parliament for example has a very high percentage of property developers among it's ranks ( traders ) . And few or no workers !

Political parties that are exclusive by ideology or religion or ethnicity and operate in an area , can not possibly represent the entire population . And therefore other political parties that can represent them , must operate in these regions . No individual should be left with no representation . Also no individual can be a member of two different political parties .

It's high time to take Russia-Iran military cooperation to the next level! One way or another Saudi-Israeli alliance will attack them from strong US backing and arming. Better start preparing. Don't count on Europe. They are still pussies, they have no gut to ignore order from US.

T-47 wrote:It's high time to take Russia-Iran military cooperation to the next level! One way or another Saudi-Israeli alliance will attack them from strong US backing and arming. Better start preparing. Don't count on Europe. They are still pussies, they have no gut to ignore order from US.

This is very hard to do for Russia, if Russia does more military cooperation with Iran than more sanctions will come on Russia. I think the Iranians will turn to China for military cooperation, China is one country that the US cannot sanction without hurting itself. Iran needs about $15-$20 billion in arms and I think 90% of that money goes to China.

Russia is in a position where it actually benefits from being pushed away by the US, and by the look of it the EU is not going to tear up the nuclear deal with Iran, so how can the US sanction Russia and not the EU and China?

Sorry... my mistake... why cloud the situation with common sense. of course the US can sanction Russia and not the EU or China...

The point is that there is more potential for trade between Iran and Russia than there is between Russia and the US, and a more stable future between Iran and Russia, so why would Russia waste time with the US?

Of course perhaps this was the plan all along... the current setup means Iran is tied to no nuke weapons with the remaining agreement with everyone except the US, but the US gets to put its sanctions in place again... presumably locking up all the Iranian money they are pinching, and restricting the Iranian economy, but getting Iran to agree to the other members of the pact that they will not develop nuclear weapons...

In such a situation I would say the better option for Iran is to demand a new agreement, because they are keeping their end of the bargain but with the US out the other side of the bargain is not the same...