Geopolitic disasters start with relatively minor cracks that eventually evolve into wide gaps causing extensive systems to collapse. The destiny appears to await the Caspian region, a zone where the interests of Russia, Azerbaijan, Iran, Turkmenistan, and Kazakhstan collide. External threats hang permanently over the Caspian countries.
Iran is currently facing the highest risks. It is clear that any destabilization in the country would have far-reaching consequences for all of its regional peers. Azerbaijan will be the first to be presented with serious problems, considering that around 5 million Azerbaijani nationals inhabit Iranian Azerbaijan, which is a northern part of Iran, the ties between the Azerbaijani populations in Iran and the post-Soviet Azerbaijan are known to be close, and the border between the two will remain fairly porous regardless of the measures Baku will likely take to tighten control. As the next phase, the instability will spill via Azerbaijan over the entire region.
Under the scenario, Russia will have to deal with a new war in the Caucasus. Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan will be the last to be affected, but that far from means that the two republics have nothing to worry about in the context.
These days, the West's intelligence services are quite successful at drawing into a single plot the forces as diverse as liberal oppositions, Muslim extremists, and terrorist groups to undermine the authorities in various countries. The myth of a war the West is fighting against international terrorists quietly sank into oblivion – in Libya in the recent past and in Syria at the moment, terrorists preaching radical Islam and the liberal oppositions shared the West's support and jointly fought against the legitimate regimes.
Orange revolutions obviously belong to the past, the new reality being the proliferation of liberal-terrorist revolutions. The picture has to be born in mind when the recent incident – the grounding in Turkey of a Syrian liner with a cargo of radar equipment en route from Moscow to Damascus – is interpreted.
Washington made no secret of tipping off Ankara that the stuff was on the way to Syria, and Turkey clearly decided in favor of the provocation only upon consulting with the US. Preventing the radar equipment from reaching Syria could only be of secondary importance to the US-Turkish tandem as the amount of cargo to be found aboard could not be sufficient to tilt the balance of forces in Syria. Rather, the objectives were political – Moscow was exposed while lending a hand to B. Assad, plus Ankara and Washington got an opportunity to express their readiness to ignite a considerable political conflict if that is integral to the cost of regime change in Damascus.
Still, a wider objective can be discerned behind the forced landing of the Syrian liner. As the pivotal moment in Syria is drawing closer, the point could be to sound out Russia's reaction to coming under pressure over the country.
With Washington's blessing, R. Erdogan took the leading role in the anti-Syrian campaign. A pretext for an intervention to topple B. Assad should not be hard to arrange for, and it must be realized in Moscow that his chances to stay afloat are slim. In the nearest future, we are likely to hear about the Syrian Kurds whom Damascus authorized to form self-defense groups crossing into Turkey to perpetrate terrorist acts, and will witness a provocation involving a terrorist attack with Turkish civilian fatalities. An uproar in the media will follow and the Turkish army will have the justification to launch an offensive against the neighboring country.
Knowing how Moscow will respond is a prerequisite for giving the green light to the above program. Moscow's soft stance would be indicative of its intention to stay out of the escalating game, which may in fact be a reasonable position, and, if this is the case, the US-Turkish alliance need not exercise any restraint. However, now that the Gaddafi regime has been bulldozed in Libya, the trio of Syria, Russia, and Iran find their interests tightly interwoven. From Moscow's perspective, it has to be taken into account that – after sweeping over Syria, Iran, and Azerbaijan – the domino effect in the form of multiplying liberal-terrorist revolutions would shatter Russia's segments of the Caucasus and of the Caspian region.
The media and diplomatic wars against Syria are raging non-stop. B. Assad, a completely moderate figure, is portrayed globally as a ruthless dictator and a butcher. In a sinister coincidence, a similar smear campaign used to be waged against late M. Gaddafi. No coverage to disprove the allegations is heard, and in today's world being defeated on the propaganda battlefield imminently translates into the loss of geopolitical positions. The global rivalry – between civilizations and over key economic resources – is primarily played out in the realm of ideas, concepts, and images shaping the public perceptions, while the military force is mostly used to put the finishing touches on the resulting picture.
Russia simply must voice a strong diplomatic reaction to the grounding of the plane flying from Moscow, to the confiscation of the absolutely legal cargo, and to the ill treatment of the passengers and the crew in Turkey, as well as to the attempts made by the US, a country which has disgraced itself across the world on too many occasions, to contribute “moral” arbitration to the situation. Moreover, Russia should demonstrate with utmost clarity that its attitude towards the developments in Syria may not be called into question.
The recent incident related to Syria is a real crash test for Russia's international policies. The contours of the world of tomorrow depend enormously on how Moscow handles the existing and arising Syrian issues, and a smashing message must be sent to those who sought to sound out the Russian reaction by pulling the provocation.
Washington is not in a position to confront Moscow with “moral” judgments, but Russia certainly has the moral right to act as necessary with the goal of backing Syria, possibly by supplying to the country – with absolute openness about it – the adequate means of self-defense.
Foto: aljazeera.com
