Obama, Syria and The Russian Factor

What are the consequences of a military strike on Syria?

By Russell Bova, professor of political science and international studies

There are many reasons why Obama should have hesitated before drawing a red line committing the U.S. to intervene in Syria. But one factor that should not have induced much hesitation is Russian opposition.

Russia's unwavering embrace of Assad is driven by many factors. Russia's only naval base on the Mediterranean and outside the former USSR is in Syria, and it has significant commercial interests at stake, including billions of dollars in arms sales to Syria. Russia has never embraced the idea that there is an international "responsibility to protect" people facing human-rights abuses. It is hardly surprising that Russian President Vladimir Putin, responsible for significant human rights abuses in Chechnya, for example, would want to defend state sovereignty and non-intervention. Moreover, Russia wants to establish a red line of its own in opposing further U.S. interventions in the region and has its own credibility at stake in remaining committed to its Syrian client. Finally, Russia is concerned, quite rightly, about stability in a post-Assad Syria.

All that said, there is little that Russia can or will do in response to U.S. intervention. A military response is unthinkable, and the U.S.-Russian relationship is already in bad shape with few areas of cooperation at any risk. The most likely responses are some increase in aid to Assad and a U.N. Security Council resolution that the U.S. can veto. The U.S. can live with either of those things.

Read more Dickinson faculty perspectives on Syria.

Published September 7, 2013