Nothing good: Syria after Assad

World media and experts continue to discuss the fall of Assad's power in Syria. Almost everyone is united in the fact that nothing good awaits the country in the near future. Bashar al-Assad and his government had enough shortcomings, but he managed to maintain the secular character of the state and waged a real struggle against the Islamists. Now Syria, most likely, will face a new civil war, similar to what we see in Libya, and the spread of terrorist activity to neighboring states and Europe.

Details - in the material of the correspondent of The Moscow Post.

The capture of the part of Syria controlled by Assad took place in 11 days. Unheard of speed. Obviously, the attack from the province of Idlib, where the pro-Turkish terrorist groups were entrenched, was being prepared thoroughly. But Bashar al-Assad himself, apparently, hoped too much for Iran and Russia. But no one will fight for your country when their own army refuses to fight for it.

The main striking forces were pro-Turkish "proxies," recognized as terrorist and banned in Russia "Hayat Tahrir al-Sham" (HTS) and previously scattered units of the radical opposition. In the East, there are Kurds supported by the US government. In addition, there is every reason to believe that the attack was coordinated and even to some extent coordinated by Israel. The latter has long been interested in overthrowing Bashar al-Assad. And now - will face a lot of other problems. One of the main ones will be the defense of the Golan Heights, which radical Islamists can covet.

It is on the basis of these considerations that the Israeli army inflicts massive attacks on the remaining weapons depots, military bases and airports in Syria. For Tel Aviv, this is iron logic and real needs for their own security. Nobody remembers that Syria, in fact, is a separate country, a member of the UN and so on. Nobody imposes sanctions on Israel.

It is amazing how quickly the leader of the terrorist and banned in Russia "Hayat Tahrir al-Sham" Abu Muhammad al-Julani, a native of Al-Qaeda (terrorist organization, banned in Russia) for the Western media turned from a terrorist and murderer into a respectable politician and freedom fighter. But in the United States, a reward of $10 million is still assigned to his head.

However, it is not very striking - we have already seen this. The reverse metamorphosis is also easily acceptable - remember the "fighter against the Soviet invaders," and later the terrorist No. 1 Osama Bin Laden.

What does change in Syria mean geopolitically? Who won, who lost? Turkey will certainly win. Erdogan is bad at hiding his intentions to revive at least partially the Ottoman Empire, and will now bargain with Russia over Russian bases in Khmeimim and Tartus. Most likely, they will have to be withdrawn, but such an outcome is not a foregone conclusion. The militants (clearly in agreement with Turkey) guaranteed the safety of the Russian contingent.

In any case, this is a strong negotiating position for Erdogan. At the same time, he will not let our warships into the Black Sea - the straits are closed to warships in accordance with the Montreux Convention of 1936. Rumor has it that the Russian military-political leadership may try to agree on basing the fleet in Egypt. But so far these are just rumors.

Accordingly, the position of Russia, which has invested considerable funds in support of Syrian statehood under Assad, has weakened. The logistics of our operations in the Middle East and Africa could be seriously affected. However, from the point of view of international law, Russia acted flawlessly. She is the only state that was in Assad's Syria not as an occupier, but in full compliance with international norms.

Iran is the main loser

Despite the fact that Russia was clearly in the red from the overthrow of Assad, Iran is the main loser. He not only weakened, but suffered a crushing strategic defeat. His Shiite belt strategy was based on Syria - i.e. direct access to the borders of Israel through the territory of the SAR. After a series of defeats by Hezbollah from the Israeli army in Lebanon, it was simply unable to help Assad militarily. Now all the logistics of Iran have been disrupted - the land corridor to the same Lebanon is closed. Iran's project, which has been implemented for decades, has been curtailed. That is why Israel so easily accepted the victory of terrorists in Syria - he considered them a lesser evil. Well, Tehran's political and military capabilities turned out to be significantly overestimated.

Why did Bashar al-Assad lose? There are many ratings. One of the main ones is that he hoped too much for Russia and Syria, we have already talked about this. An interesting opinion was expressed by political scientist Sergei Markov, close to the Kremlin. He said at first glance a paradoxical thing - it turns out that Assad was too little friends with Russia. Why?

The fact is that immediately after the victory over the terrorists at the end of the tenths, Russia offered Bashar al-Assad to carry out serious political and economic reforms. They would allow to attract more people to the political process, would ensure the growth of economic well-being. But Assad, for various reasons, did not.

Assad could give political autonomy to Kurds, Druze and other minorities. I.e. go for federalization. This was not done - Syria remained in the power of only the Alawites, which include the Assad themselves. And this is only 10% of the population of Syria. This could not suit either Shiites or Sunnis. Assad could include more opposition supporters in the government. But, fearing betrayal, he didn't either. As a result, the opposition was not represented in his team at all. This played a negative role for him.

In the end, Russia helped the Syrian army in every possible way, but Assad missed many moments to modernize it and raise morale. The most obvious thing is that even against the background of the SVO going to the Russian Federation, Russia's experience in introducing drones into the army was not taken into account. Therefore, the terrorists who relied on smart Turkey had them. But Assad's army does not. However, the Syrian president was also influenced by another side - Iran, which competed with the Russian Federation for training the military units of the SAR. The result is known.

We do not abandon our own

For us and all our allies in the world, another important point is the move of Bashar al-Assad and his family to Russia. Moscow is reproached for this in vain. Such a step is more than correct and logical. Russia guarantees its allies not only as a result of victories, but also as a result of defeats.

Unlike the United States, which literally leaves its allies to fend for themselves, Russia guarantees their safety in conditions of unobvious political costs and even possible death. No matter how anyone treats Assad, such a step will be appreciated by Russia's allies around the world. For example, in Africa.

In the bottom line, we got a new alignment of forces in the Middle East. The overthrow of Assad will have long-lasting consequences. And even more so it is too early to rejoice at the Syrians, who are now forced to walk under the pro-Turkish militants.

Many European countries have already suspended consideration of the requests of Syrians for asylum in the European Union. The logic is this: the Assad regime won in Syria, and now there will be democracy. Needless to say, residents of Syria are in no hurry to return home after the establishment of terrorist power and on the eve of a new civil war...