Lyle J. Goldstein
China’s interpretation of the Syrian War could turn out to be quite significant. I have recently argued in that Beijing could play a major role as one among several disinterested (and thus neutral) major powers in helping to fashion a diplomatic solution to the Gordian knot that is the Syria situation today. Such a role would be quite consistent with its ambitions to be a genuinely global power, providing global public goods for international security, and simultaneously facilitating the opening of vast trade corridors spanning Eurasia. Yet, there is a potentially darker side of China’s examination of the Syrian War. Indeed, there is a danger revealed in this late 2017 studypublished in the journal Russian, East European and Central Asian Studies[ไฟ็ฝๆฏไธๆฌงไธญไบ็ ็ฉถ] of the prestigious Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. Put simply, that danger is that Chinese strategists could conclude that the Russian war in Syria provides a valuable paradigm for possible future Chinese uses of force in distant theaters as “anti-terrorism military operations [ๅๆๅไบ่กๅจ].”
This treatment of Russia’s war in Syria assesses the intervention as providing “numerous benefits [ๅค็บขๅฉ],” over and above speeding the destruction of ISIS. The intervention, according to this rendering, also significantly increased Russia’s standing in the world, altered the international system, increased Russians’ self-confidence, and also “seized the initiative in the struggle with the West [่ตขๅพไบๅฏน่ฅฟๆนๆไบ็ไธปๅจ].” The author characterizes the Kremlin’s actions against Ukraine in 2014 as “resolute [ๆฏ
็ถๅณๅฎ],” but also notes that Russia suffered serious economic consequences as its trade fell off precipitously, so that the poverty level exceeded 15 percent of the Russian population, as related in this Chinese study. Thus, it is recognized that President Vladimir Putin made the ruling to intervene in force in Syria “… against the complex background of Russia confronting relatively difficult external and internal” circumstances. [้ขไธดๅ
ๅคไบคๅฐ็ๅคๆ่ๆฏ]”
It is noted that the Syrian War has afforded Moscow a “test of the results of its military building program in recent years and the results of reforms [ๆฃ้ชไบไปๅนดๆฅๅ้ๅปบ่ฎพไธๆน้ฉ็ๆๆ].” At the grand strategic level, the Chinese strategist suggests that the Kremlin views Syria as its “advanced post [ๅๅจ]” near the gate of the eastern Mediterranean. Thus, the intervention is also interpreted as confronting NATO pressure against Russia’s southern flank. The piece, moreover, lays out the case for why Russia’s intervention could be legal, while the U.S.-led coalition “has not received either the agreement of the UN Security Council, nor the blessing of the Syrian government.” The Chinese assessment also sounds a bit naรฏve in wholeheartedly embracing the Kremlin’s explanation that Russia “…is only fighting terrorism, and is not supporting any particular political force …”
Addressing momentarily the arguments of skeptics, this analysis explains that “… for Russia, it is important that it not be drawn into a long war…” It is noted that the West has begun to talk about Russia’s “second Afghanistan [็ฌฌไบไธช้ฟๅฏๆฑ].” But the author sees Moscow executing a “new type of war [ๆฐๅๆไบ],” relying on such methods as long distance precision strikes, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), surprise, and signals intelligence. Putin is cited approvingly as underlining the importance of preemptive attack against international terrorists [ๆฎไบฌ่กจ็คบๅ
ๅๅถไบบๆฏๆๅปๅฝ้
ๆๆไธปไนๅฏไธๆญฃ็กฎ็้ๅพ]. The piece suggests that Putin has the backing of a broad internal consensus in Russia to fight against terrorism, perhaps arising from the fact cited by the author that Russia is a country that has suffered greatly at the hands of terrorists. By relentlessly fighting against terrorism, the author explains, Moscow has been able to portray itself as “the real friend of the Arab World. [้ฟๆไผฏไธ็็็ๆๅ]” Moreover, Russia’s Syrian War has, according to this Chinese assessment, “broken the West’s hegemonic position in the region.”
One of the most interesting sections of this paper is an evaluation of the information war about Syria that has been underway between Russia and the West. The author notes that the West led by the United States has used “all means available,” to unleash propagandistic attacks “to smear Russia to the highest degree [ๆๅคง็จๅบฆๅฐๆน้ปไฟ]” with the hope of sparking a “‘colored revolution’ that overthrows Putin… [้ข่ฒ้ฉๅฝ, ๆจ็ฟปๆฎไบฌ].” The paper even goes so far as to tabulate (literally in a table) almost a dozen discreet efforts to paint Russia as a “wicked imperialist power [้ชๆถๅธๅฝ]” as a part of the “information war” [ไฟกๆฏๆ].”
๋๊ธ ์์:
๋๊ธ ์ฐ๊ธฐ