Why does Putin support Assad in Syria?
What does Putin have to gain?
Is he simply trying to destabilize Europe with continued floods of refugees?
What does Russia stand to gain?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
8 Answers
A dictator stabilises the region, and makes it easier for Putin to excert some measure of control and influence.
Syria has been an ally of Russia since the end of the Second World War. It is natural that Russia would want to support its ally. Also Tartus in Syria is Russia’s only naval base in the Mediterranean and only Assad guarantees its existence.
You might ask why the west didn’t do more to support the opponents of Assad especially after saying Assad was unfit to lead and had to go. This seems to be because the rebellion became increasingly Islamist and a threat to the wider region and so we bombed ISIS and indirectly helped keep Assad in power.
There are 2 points worthy of note. No degree of desperation will result in swarms of people swamping Russian borders. And it is not mere coincidence that any stable governing of Islamic populations requires a repressive and autocratic despot.
Putin doesn’t give a fuck about Assad. It could be Attila the Hun for all he cares. It is just an in for Russia in the Middle East.
There is a reason the Syrians are running West and not East.
What would happen if no one helped Assad? Several groups of opposition including ISIS and AlQaedeh will dominate the country; Yes, there are also some liberal groups like Kurdish Army. But when a country is left without any central government, the result is clear: Chaos.
Don’t forget that ISIS is the fruit of those weapons and supports given by West to oppositions. I know that Russia has its own benefits in this action, however it is very natural to support the last governor of a messy country collapsing into a real hell!
We can debate whether it is the thug that is responsible for the turmoil or the turmoil that brings out the thug, but it makes sense that a thug of proven talent would conclude that the optimum chance for stability must involve an iron fist. Scant analysis is required to appreciate that when considering the region involved, nothing else works. Since there is clearly no shortage of thugs, It’s merely a matter of choosing the capable thug most in tune with your sentiments and cognizant of the benefits that flow from loyalty to a benefactor. For Putin, the thug in place has more than demonstrated both consistent loyalty and the ruthless thuggery required to get the job done. Merry Christmas
Answer this question 
This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.
Composing members:
0
