Context

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev visited Syria and Turkey last week with a bevy of discussion topics on the agenda. From Iran to the Middle East Peace Process, Moscow is signaling to the Middle East, and the region at large, that it is serious about taking a leading role in the future of the region.

This Vantage Point Analysis takes a closer at the changing balance of power in Middle East and how the Russians envision their role in the region. This article also provides clues to understanding potential Russian engagement in other regions, for example the Af-Pak Theater.

Analysis

Syria played host to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev for the May 10, two day visit. While Russia and Syria were previously close allies and formed a very important partnership in the region, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and a period of retrenchment for both countries during the ’90s, the relationship diminished somewhat. In recent years the bilateral relationship has been regaining some of its polish, with the visit by Medvedev an important signal that the two countries are well on the way to a new, firm strategic partnership.

The visit comes just days after the US renewed its sanctions regime against Syria because of Syria’s alleged “continuing support for terrorist organizations and pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and missile programs,[which]continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy and economy of the United States.” US President Obama said on the May 3 in a press conference about the sanctions.

The US and Israel are concerned that the Russian high-level visit is sending a tacit signal of approval to Syria, who will feel emboldened by the Russian show of support in the face of the recent sanctions. Israel is especially concerned about the Russian visit, and keen to know if there will be any more arms deals between the two countries. Israel has previously accused the Syrians of passing on weapons acquired in Russian arms deals to Hezbollah in Lebanon, a claim which Syria denies. This will likely dampen the possibility of renewed armament deals, especially as Israel has also accused Syria of intending to pass on weapons to Iran as well.

Russian sentiment during the visit is overwhelmingly that Russia is ‘a friend to all’. Medvedev met with exiled Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal during his visit, and at the same time promised to ‘send a message’ from Israel to Syrian President Bashar Al Assad to try and ease the tensions between the two states: whether he actually did or not is still unclear.

The Russian visit is also a signal that Russia is looking to boost its status as a moderator and mediator in the region, with Medvedev stating his concern that “Tensions in the Middle East threaten to lead to a new explosion or even a catastrophe.” Russia is perhaps trying to show itself as the ‘unbiased’ mediator, in contrast to the perceived Israel-bias of the US when it comes to the Middle East Peace Process.

The Russian President continued his overseas tour with a trip to Turkey, where business was on the agenda. Medvedev stated that “We can confidently say that Russian-Turkish relations have advanced to the level of a multidimensional strategic partnership,” which was actualized by the signing of a visa-free agreement between citizens of the two countries. The 2 million+ Russians who visit Turkey every year as tourists will be very pleased with that particular dimension of the multidimensional partnership.

Russia and Turkey share a mutual vision to some extent as far as their roles in the Middle East are concerned, with Turkey renewing overtures to moderate peace talks between Israel and Syria. The feeling is that Turkish-Russian relations are much more mutually beneficial, and less benefactor/beneficiary than those of Russia and Syria, despite how Syria would protest this statement.

Energy played a key role in the Turkish and Russian talks, with the proposed Blue Stream-2 and South Stream gas pipelines discussed, as well as the possibility of a Russian-built nuclear power plant on Turkish soil.

It is overwhelmingly clear that Russia is positioning herself as the ‘Great Friend’ in the Middle East neighborhood. Russia is doing a good job of being friends with everybody, even those who have unbridled antagonism towards one another, like Israel and Syria-how long Russia can continue pull this off is yet to be seen.

Russian statements also make it clear that Syria is considered a pivotal country in the success of the Middle East Peace Process. Russia’s playing down of weapons deals, and the keen interest in joint economic activity may be a ploy to pry Syria open economically, into the open-market economics that Russia has embraced. Economic openness is often a precursor to political openness and moderation, but then again, Russia is not overly concerned with the types of polities it does business with, so long as business is beneficial.

The relationship of both Syria and Russia with Iran was also under scrutiny during the visit. Many thought that Syria’s Assad would use the visit to try and convince Medvedev to block the planned fourth round of Iranian sanctions in the Security Council: sanctions which Russia as it is seems reluctant to endorse. This is perhaps due to the fact that a Russian-built nuclear power plant in Bushehr in Iran is set to be completed this year. While the power plant was endorsed by the US because it would mitigate the need for Iran to continue with uranium enrichment programs, this has not been the case in reality, so the sanctions are being tightened.

As Russia seems to want to take a leading role in the neighborhood of the Middle East, it is also positioning for a role in the Af-Pak region.

Russia and Pakistan have a rollercoaster relationship, with relations at their sourest during the Soviet war in Afghanistan, and the cozy bond that existed between India and the Soviet Union at this time. Irked by the American criticism, Karzai has recently made a number of overtures towards the Russians, a scene reminding the players of the cold war days. India also stands disillusioned by the new US Af-Pak strategy, which has caused it to strive for closer Indo-Russian ties once again.

Russia and Pakistan seem to skirt around their possibly strong bilateral relationships-on Pakistan’s end, perhaps this is in fear of upsetting allies in Washington. On Russia’s end perhaps they are biding their time until the US withdraws from Afghanistan. Then they can have free reign to play the ‘Great Friend’ and benefactor role in this region, as it is showing overtures to want to play in the Middle East. Russia, like China, has shown a keen interest in Iran-Pakistan Gas Pipeline Project.

Soon after Medvedev’s visit to the region came the joint declaration yesterday by Iran, Turkey and Brazil on the signing of the Nuclear Swap Agreement. This development has caught everyone by surprise. PoliTact will be examining the ramifications of this development.

Tell Us What You Think
Feedback@politact.com

The post Russian Role in Middle East and South Asia appeared first on Politact.

Russian ambassador to the United Nations Vitali Churkin announced his country opposed a West-drafted UN resolution on Syria. In an interview on Monday on Russia Today, Churkin said “The draft resolution on Syria is completely non-objective and it envisages pressure on the Syrian authorities only.” He also said his country feared radical Syrian elements coming to the forefront in any move to topple the government.

In a recent message to Syrian President Bashar al Assad, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev asked for an immediate stop to violence. Moscow also urged for dialogue, stating it vital for restoration of order in the country.

The post Russia Opposes UN Resolution On Syria appeared first on Politact.

Context
Russian space and defense industries will get massive investments under existing development programs, according to President Dmitry Medvedev. During a visit to a college in the Moscow area, Medvedev announced that the government would assist the military-industrial cluster in financing those industries. “Money will be invested into the country’s military-industrial cluster. It will be taken not from the budget but from these plants’ own business activity,” said the president. Medvedev, however, warned that the changes are not expected to occur within a few years. As per the government development plan for military-industrial complex, the state is going to allocate 20 trillion rubles (US$ 720 billion) for weaponry modernization.

The post Russia Pledges Massive Space, Military Investments appeared first on Politact.

Context

The opposition Conservative party led by David Cameron has secured more seats than the ruling Labor party in the UK general elections. The Conservatives won 307 seats, 19 short of the 326 seats required for a majority, with Labor winning 255 and the Liberal Democrats 59. Since no single political party was able to win an outright majority, there would be a hung parliament in Britain for the first time in 36 years. David Cameron succeeded Gordon Brown as the prime minister of Britain. Since the Conservative party didn’t have enough seats for a majority government, they were therefore forced to form a joint government with the Liberal Democrats, which is the country’s third largest party. The agreement allowed Nick Clegg, the leader of Liberal Democrat, to become the country’s deputy prime minister.

This Vantage Point Analysis looks at the impact of UK election on its Af-Pak policy and how this in turn might impact the new US strategy on war against terror, Pakistan and India.

Analysis

The general elections in the UK come at a time when the country’s economy is in a dire state. The new coalition government will be expected to take action to deal with the record budget deficit. Britain’s economic crisis had dominated the election campaign and each rival party had promised to take effective measures to steer the economy out of recession.

The country’s ailing economy was also the agenda of the first cabinet meeting. Markets will closely monitor how rapidly this new Conservative-led government will implement a plan to deal with the massive 163bn pounds deficit by cutting down public spending, initially by 6bn pounds during the current financial year.

Implications for the war on terror:

There are 10,000 British troops currently deployed in Afghanistan. After the US, Britain is the biggest contributor to the NATO-led forces in Afghanistan. With such a large number of British troops committed to this war, Af-Pak will naturally be one of the most important agendas of Britain’s foreign policy. Many people expect the Conservatives to support most aspects of America’s war on terror. Amongst the three political parties in Britain, the Conservative party is the most active in addressing the threats posed to the UK by Islamic extremism, which also has direct consequences for the US national security.

Until recently, all three major political parties in the UK were not in favor of immediate troop withdrawal, despite strong public opinion against the war. However, the new government set up will make it extremely unlikely for a minority government with a hung parliament to ignore the public pressure, thus affecting Britain’s long-term commitment to the war.

Furthermore, as the Liberal Democrats will play a pivotal role in the next government, they are expected to push for an early troop withdrawal from Afghanistan. It should also be remembered that the Liberal party’s manifesto doesn’t even talk about NATO, which clearly indicates how they perceive the Afghan war. Clegg has already signaled that he is uneasy with the rising casualties.

The outcome of these elections will also have important implications for Britain’s national security policy. David Cameron has vowed to outlaw some Islamic organizations operating in Britain, for instance Hizb-ul-Tahrir. In contrast, Nick Clegg is strongly against the war on terror and has pointed the finger at his own country for involvement in the “torture” of suspected terrorists. Neither the Labor party nor the Liberal Democrats see the war on terror as the main concern for Britain. As the Liberals are all set to play a key role in the government, there may be major, unconstructive implications for Britain’s intelligence services and their ability to work together with their American counterparts. Both Cameron and Clegg have indicated that they favor looser ties with America than those enjoyed by Brown and his forerunner, Tony Blair.

The appointment of Sayeeda Warsi as the first British female Muslim Cabinet Minister will go a long way in improving the image of Muslims in UK and Europe. She is also the Conservative party’s chairwoman. PoliTact has previously recommended that Muslims need to be seen in important policy shaping positions in Europe and US. These steps will have a positive impact on countering the blow back of the war on terror on these countries. Such steps also effectively reply to the propaganda campaign being waged by the extremists to recruit members from the Muslim communities of these countries.

Implications for India and Pakistan:

Conservative governments have traditionally been more inclined towards India than Pakistan on sensitive issues like Kashmir. New British Prime Minister David Cameron has openly stated that he wants to work towards establishing a “new special relationship” with India and favors its bid for a permanent presence in the UN Security Council. At the same time, he also wants greater stability in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

In short, Conservative party’s approach to India and Pakistan won’t be much different from the Labor party’s. They will continue to follow American line and persuade both countries to cooperate with each other so that the Pakistani military can focus more on the western border regions. In a recent foreign policy briefing, Britain’s new Foreign Minister Hague took the usual middle path between India and Pakistan. As France, Germany and Russia once again exert their power and influence in Europe, the new British government has little option but to support American foreign policy in the AfPak region and beyond.

Tell Us What You Think

Feedback@politact.com

The post General Election in UK and its Implications for the War on Terror, India and Pakistan: appeared first on Politact.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev visited Syria and Turkey last week with a bevy of discussion topics on the agenda. From Iran to the Middle East Peace Process, Moscow is signaling to the Middle East, and the region at large, that it is serious about taking a leading role in the future of the region.

This Vantage Point Analysis takes a closer at the changing balance of power in Middle East and how the Russians envision their role in the region. This article also provides clues to understanding potential Russian engagement in other regions, for example the Af-Pak Theater.

Analysis

Syria played host to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev for the May 10, two day visit. While Russia and Syria were previously close allies and formed a very important partnership in the region, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and a period of retrenchment for both countries during the ’90s, the relationship diminished somewhat. In recent years the bilateral relationship has been regaining some of its polish, with the visit by Medvedev an important signal that the two countries are well on the way to a new, firm strategic partnership.

The visit comes just days after the US renewed its sanctions regime against Syria because of Syria’s alleged “continuing support for terrorist organizations and pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and missile programs,[which]continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy and economy of the United States.” US President Obama said on the May 3 in a press conference about the sanctions.

The US and Israel are concerned that the Russian high-level visit is sending a tacit signal of approval to Syria, who will feel emboldened by the Russian show of support in the face of the recent sanctions. Israel is especially concerned about the Russian visit, and keen to know if there will be any more arms deals between the two countries. Israel has previously accused the Syrians of passing on weapons acquired in Russian arms deals to Hezbollah in Lebanon, a claim which Syria denies. This will likely dampen the possibility of renewed armament deals, especially as Israel has also accused Syria of intending to pass on weapons to Iran as well.

Russian sentiment during the visit is overwhelmingly that Russia is ‘a friend to all’. Medvedev met with exiled Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal during his visit, and at the same time promised to ‘send a message’ from Israel to Syrian President Bashar Al Assad to try and ease the tensions between the two states: whether he actually did or not is still unclear.

The Russian visit is also a signal that Russia is looking to boost its status as a moderator and mediator in the region, with Medvedev stating his concern that “Tensions in the Middle East threaten to lead to a new explosion or even a catastrophe.” Russia is perhaps trying to show itself as the ‘unbiased’ mediator, in contrast to the perceived Israel-bias of the US when it comes to the Middle East Peace Process.

The Russian President continued his overseas tour with a trip to Turkey, where business was on the agenda. Medvedev stated that “We can confidently say that Russian-Turkish relations have advanced to the level of a multidimensional strategic partnership,” which was actualized by the signing of a visa-free agreement between citizens of the two countries. The 2 million+ Russians who visit Turkey every year as tourists will be very pleased with that particular dimension of the multidimensional partnership.

Russia and Turkey share a mutual vision to some extent as far as their roles in the Middle East are concerned, with Turkey renewing overtures to moderate peace talks between Israel and Syria. The feeling is that Turkish-Russian relations are much more mutually beneficial, and less benefactor/beneficiary than those of Russia and Syria, despite how Syria would protest this statement.

Energy played a key role in the Turkish and Russian talks, with the proposed Blue Stream-2 and South Stream gas pipelines discussed, as well as the possibility of a Russian-built nuclear power plant on Turkish soil.

It is overwhelmingly clear that Russia is positioning herself as the ‘Great Friend’ in the Middle East neighborhood. Russia is doing a good job of being friends with everybody, even those who have unbridled antagonism towards one another, like Israel and Syria-how long Russia can continue pull this off is yet to be seen.

Russian statements also make it clear that Syria is considered a pivotal country in the success of the Middle East Peace Process. Russia’s playing down of weapons deals, and the keen interest in joint economic activity may be a ploy to pry Syria open economically, into the open-market economics that Russia has embraced. Economic openness is often a precursor to political openness and moderation, but then again, Russia is not overly concerned with the types of polities it does business with, so long as business is beneficial.

The relationship of both Syria and Russia with Iran was also under scrutiny during the visit. Many thought that Syria’s Assad would use the visit to try and convince Medvedev to block the planned fourth round of Iranian sanctions in the Security Council: sanctions which Russia as it is seems reluctant to endorse. This is perhaps due to the fact that a Russian-built nuclear power plant in Bushehr in Iran is set to be completed this year. While the power plant was endorsed by the US because it would mitigate the need for Iran to continue with uranium enrichment programs, this has not been the case in reality, so the sanctions are being tightened.

As Russia seems to want to take a leading role in the neighborhood of the Middle East, it is also positioning for a role in the Af-Pak region.

Russia and Pakistan have a rollercoaster relationship, with relations at their sourest during the Soviet war in Afghanistan, and the cozy bond that existed between India and the Soviet Union at this time. Irked by the American criticism, Karzai has recently made a number of overtures towards the Russians, a scene reminding the players of the cold war days. India also stands disillusioned by the new US Af-Pak strategy, which has caused it to strive for closer Indo-Russian ties once again.

Russia and Pakistan seem to skirt around their possibly strong bilateral relationships-on Pakistan’s end, perhaps this is in fear of upsetting allies in Washington. On Russia’s end perhaps they are biding their time until the US withdraws from Afghanistan. Then they can have free reign to play the ‘Great Friend’ and benefactor role in this region, as it is showing overtures to want to play in the Middle East. Russia, like China, has shown a keen interest in Iran-Pakistan Gas Pipeline Project.

Soon after Medvedev’s visit to the region came the joint declaration yesterday by Iran, Turkey and Brazil on the signing of the Nuclear Swap Agreement. This development has caught everyone by surprise. PoliTact will be examining the ramifications of this development.

Tell Us What You Think
Feedback@politact.com

The post Russia: The New ‘Great Friend’ in the Middle East? appeared first on Politact.