In the wake of the shooting down of a Russian fighter jet that, according to the Turkish government, violated Turkey’s airspace, tensions between Moscow’s forces and America’s allies have escalated to a dangerous degree, It is an appropriate time to review what the Kremlin’s actual goals in the region may be.
Moscow’s explanation of its activities in Syria in regard to ISIS has been blunt, and strongly stated during an interview on the Rossiya television network with Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev
“After all, everyone can see that their (Western) activities in this region to combat ISIS have amounted to practically nothing, and ISIS continues to spread. Only Russia’s involvement has changed the situation.”
Paul Davis, a retired US Army military intelligence and former Soviet analyst serves as the president of the Janus consulting firm. Writing in Rudaw, he presents a different point of view:
“Russia is building a regional coalition to include Syria, Iran and Iraq…Russian fighters have tested Turkish air defenses by flying into Turkish air space. Russian have flown toward US fighters in Syria turning just outside the range of US air-to-air missiles. Elsewhere Russia has tested US and European reaction in the air and at sea…All military operations have both short term and long term goals. The short term Russian goal is twofold… First to shore up Assad and second to impose itself once again into the Middle East. Beyond this is reducing or removing United States influence, being able to sit on the oil distribution routes to Europe and the rest of the world, and continuing turmoil in the region. What then is Russia’s long term goals? First they need to consolidate the gains made in the Crimea and in Ukraine. For that to happen NATO needs to be occupied on other problems. Second they need to fix their economy which has tanked as it is dependent on oil, so causing a crisis in the Middle East has always sent oil prices soaring. Last they need the world to know they will resort to the military option if necessary and not just in the near abroad…”
Kamagra expands and relaxes the blood vessels in the penile region increases allowing the penis to erect. levitra pills from canada While there are some medical advancements in this field, many men still suffer in silence, embarrassed to talk about erectile dysfunction probably because tadalafil cheap india it is an FDA approved medication and has been clinically accepted for the improvement of erectile dysfunction, even to the men, suffering from erectile dysfunction. Effective Approaches to Cure ED: Psychotherapy: If the ED is not relieved after six months, then various other treatments should be pursued. buy levitra in usa Diagnosis: viagra price Performance anxiety is the main cause leading way to low performances in life activities. NATO believes that the Kremlin stands to gain from ISIS activities in several ways:
“[ISIS] has provided Moscow with the opportunity to engage in the Middle East where – despite the Kremlin’s proclamations – its interests are only indirectly related to the fight against ISIL.
The exodus of foreigners to ISIL-controlled territory has implications for the global community. As is the case with those who joined revolutionary movements in the past – including the Bolsheviks – there are a variety of motivations and reasons. Their numbers are considerable, from several hundred to several thousand a month. A few thousand are from the former Soviet Union. Several hundred are from Muslim Central Asia. Possibly several hundred have come from Muslim enclaves in the Russian heartland –– Tatarstan and Bashkiria. Still, the majority clearly is from the Russian North Caucasus, mainly Chechnya. And this benefits the Kremlin considerably, relieving it from the troubles that plagued both Yeltsin and Putin throughout most of post-Soviet history. Moreover, this exodus has provided Putin with the opportunity to engage in the Syrian venture without fear of possible repercussions.
“The freedom from jihadist worries at home provides Putin with a free hand to engage in Syrian ventures. This is why one should take his public proclamations about Russia’s active involvement in the Syrian crisis with a grain of salt: This action is not being taken out of fear of ISIL; as outlined above, ISIL has paradoxically helped Putin by destroying the North Caucasian resistance as an organised force. Rather, Russia wants to demonstrate its arrival and relevance in the Middle East. It is a message sent not just to the United States but to a much broader audience, signaling to both the Arabs in the Middle East and to Israel that – at a time when Washington’s allies in the region are concerned that the United States appears to be wavering – Moscow could be a good back-up.
“The second important aspect of the Syrian venture is the implicit appeal to Europe to readmit Russia to the West… Putin’s increasing flirtation with China and Iran reflects a desire to show the West that Moscow has other options…By engaging in Syria, Putin is trying to demonstrate to Europe that Russia could be a leading force in saving Europe and Western civilisation from the threat of violent and extremist Islamism – and that Moscow should therefore not be ostracised…What are the practical implications for these actions? On the one hand, being basically free from fear of Islamic insurrection at home and, in many ways, benefiting from ISIL as a magnet for Russian-born extremists, Moscow is confident enough to stay in the Middle East for a long time and be assured that its interests in the region are respected.”