Tuesday, December 10, 2024

Why Putin Is The Biggest Loser of Assad's Downfall in Syria

 https://www.newsweek.com/putin-russia-syria-assad-ouster-1997617

Russia's military assets in Syria are now under threat, such as its naval base in the port city of Tartus, which gave the Kremlin a presence near NATO's southern flank in the Mediterranean Sea.

"This was their foothold in the Mediterranean, and from there out into the Atlantic—it will be a big blow to lose that," Edward Lucas, senior fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis (CPA) told Newsweek.

Without access to an air force base and a port that were linchpins for Moscow in the region, Murrett said: "Russia will not be in nearly as strong a position."

Also at risk are tactical outposts like Qamishli Airport in the northeast, while reports of thousands of stranded Russian personnel in Syria and equipment left abandoned point to the military cost for Putin. Russian troops have requested Ankara's help for for their safe exit, according to CNN Turk.

2 comments:

  1. People aren't talking about but the real loser here is China.
    China wants to take over the world, even Russia. Their immediate goal though is conquering Taiwan to reunite all Chinese (sound familiar, look up Austia and Sudeten, 1938) Yet in the last couple of years what's happened? The Russian invasion of Ukraine stalled partly because Chinese equipment failed in the field, hampering what should've been a rapid Russian advance. India has started to push back along the border and is also asserting itself as an alternative source of cheap manufacturing and goods, threatening China's dominant position. Meanwhile the US repeatedly asserted that it would guarantee Taiwan's sovereignty.
    Now Iran, a major Chinese client, is wobbling. Iran is a major source of oil for China. Imagine the Israelis taking out much of Iran's exporting facilities. Now China's starved for oil too.
    I recall reading that one reason Hitler, y"sh, started WW2 when he did, even though the German army wasn't completely ready (the navy, especially, didn't feel it was ready to take on the British) was because he had dedicated a chunk of German's economy to the military buildup and it hadn't generated much of a return. If he didn't go to war and start bringing in treasure, economic reality would've forced a downsizing of the army in a year or two so he started the war to keep the army affordable.
    China has followed Hitler's path except over decades instead of years but it has followed his path. They've built a huge, expensive army and to keep it affordable, they're going to need treasure sooner or later. And if their revenues drop and expenses go up, what will they do to get that treasure?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. India is actually cheaper to produce than China, but they are so corrupt (payoffs required everywhere) that it's not practical.

      Delete

ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE POSTED!
please use either your real name or a pseudonym.