• am
  • ru
  • en
print version
25.07.2011

“ARAB SPRING” AND RUSSIA

   

Artashes Ter-Harutyunyan

“Arab spring”; observations

The American and European expert circles has already began presenting their first general analyses of what the “Arab spring” gave to the West and to what extent the current dynamics is in tune with the strategic interests of the American and European powers.

If we try to summarize, according to the overwhelming majority of the assessments the change of the regimes in Tunisia, Egypt and expected changes in Libya, Yemen and Syria (in this context Iran is mentioned either) are the initial, “technical” stage of the geopolitical plan carried out by the United States and its allies. Meanwhile, the main purpose is to continue the project initiated by George W. Bush after the events on September 11, 2001, i.e. consolidation of the presence of the United States and its allies in the Big Middle East, which is considered a key region in the aspect of international political and energy security.

Mainly military means of reaching this goal used over the previous decade (wars in Afghanistan and Iraq) contributed to the fall of the image of the United States in the Muslim East, and correspondingly to weakening of its political influence. On the other hand, in course of time, the western allies were obliged to gradually renounce on the military component. Firstly, because the efficiency of the later has been only reducing and means allotted continued increasing. And secondly, returning troops from the east has become one of the topical issues on the domestic political agenda in the western countries. In the end, even the US stated the timeframe of the withdrawal of its troops from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Of course, the Arab revolutions first of all were based on objective reasons because without those reasons no “technology” could be applied. But the interest and steps taken by the western countries directed to the initiation, support and supervising of those movements were obvious1.

It is remarkable that in the time aspect the “Arab spring” was prior to the withdrawal of the troops of the western coalition from Iraq and Afghanistan. In this aspect European and American experts characterize it as substitution of the “hard power” by “soft power”2, and “Arab spring” in the prospect should result in formation of the administrations in the Muslim East close to the West and democratic values. As for the present moment the first result can already be observed: the American policy is considered in the positive light on behalf of the “Arab street”.

It should be mentioned that such a project is not a novelty for the western strategy. In essence the same approach was applied after World War II in Europe and Far East when “hard power” was followed by a “soft” one and through which a task was assigned to prove long-term presence of the US and its allies on the spots. The same we could observe after the end of the Cold War in Eastern Europe and on post-Soviet space.

It is also possible that the project has following peculiarities – to redraw the map of the region, which can be necessary if we take into consideration that there is a task to set new order and influence on the spots. E.g. it was most prominently manifested in Yugoslavia. And in this aspect we should remember a scandalous article by Ralf Peters, which was devoted to the reshaping of the borders in the Big Middle East, published 5 years ago, in June 2006 in authoritative “Armed Forces Journal”.

Factor of Russia

The “Arab spring” caused different reactions in the region. It is remarkable that all the regional powers – Iran, Turkey, Israel and Saudi Arabia, either disapproved or were at lease cautious about those processes.

Though initially Turkey stuck to the same stance, but after rather short time stance of Ankara changed and there they saw a possibility to take advantage of the situation in order to raise their influence in the region. Turkey’s activity even made anxious Russia, which appeared in a rather difficult situation as a result of the “Arab spring”, as the countries with which Moscow entered military and political and economic engagements in order to promote its Middle East policy (i.e. Syria, Libya, Iran) has either weakened or are close to the change of the regimes in consequence of revolutionary movements.

As for the Turkish activity, according to Russian expert assessments, the “Arab spring” may contribute to the fall of the Moscow’s influence in the region which began after the Cold War. And in this aspect Ankara is a new anxiety. The later became to work with the countries, which have traditionally been connected with Russia (Syria, Libya and Palestine) even before the revolutionary movements, and now it tends to take advantage of new possibilities in order to raise its influence in the aforementioned countries and to try to take Russian “niche”.

Meanwhile, in the initial stage of the “Arab spring” Russia also seemed to be a beneficiary party.

Firstly, unlike western countries, Russia is not in a state of two wars (in Afghanistan and Iraq), and it, taking the advantage of Libyan crisis, which is in fact a third war for the western powers, gives an opportunity of getting some concessions from West.

Secondly, as a result of the Arab revolutions the oil prices raised by about 20%, and this is important for the Russian economy, which have not fully recovered from the global financial and economic crisis (especially if we take into consideration that in several months parliamentary and presidential elections are to be held in Russia).

Thirdly, in consequence of the Libyan crisis Greenstream gas pipeline, which connected Libya with Italy and supplied about 11 billion m3 of natural gas to Italy, which in its turn was the third biggest gas consumer in Europe, stopped working. This circumstance has made Rome buy more gas from “Gazprom” which also provides economic benefit for Russia.

Fourthly, Arab revolutions complicated the supply of energy carriers from the Muslim East which gave an opportunity to Russia to underline its role in the stable supply of gas and oil.

Yet as for the Middle East issues according to the assessments of the Russian experts Moscow will have difficult times. This is also proved by the Russia’s last steps.

Though in March the prime-minister of Russia Vladimir Putin compared military campaign in Libya with the medieval crusade but right after the meetings of the G8 in Deauville, France, Russian president Dmitry Medvedev stated that M. Kaddafi must quit and Moscow is ready to undertake the mediatory mission between the Western countries, rebels and Kaddafi.

Even more remarkable development took place in case with Syria. Firstly, at the beginning of June Russia stopped the adoption of the resolution criticizing the Syrian authorities at the UN Security Council3 and according to the Israeli intelligence data it continues supplying this country with arms and ammunition. But already in the middle of the same month in Moscow the representatives of the Syrian opposition were received by Mikhail Margelov, the Head of the International Affairs Commission of the Upper Chamber of the Russian Parliament and Special Envoy of the Russian president

On the one hand the aforementioned measures are directed to the preservation of Russia’s military and political and economic presence in the countries of the region, and on the other hand Moscow faces the problem of the key partners – if the region is undergoing large-scale transformations, with what powers and, correspondingly, with what countries should Russia be in the partner relations?

1 Despite numerous assurances by the western mass media and even officials that president of Egypt Hosni Mubarak resigned, nobody saw it. It is known that the prime-minister of that country stated about the resignation of Mubarak. This afforded ground for believing that a coup finally took place in Egypt.

In February-March alongside with disturbances in Libya, Syria and Yemen, the similar disturbances were initiated in Bahrain, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. But unlike first three countries the revolutionary wave in the monarchies, which were the allies of the US, was not vouchsafed with the long-lasting attention of the western mass media and officials, though, e.g. in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia the events had bloody consequences.

2 By the way, in the context of the “soft power” implemented in the Muslim East, a special place is occupied by the information resources created on the spot, e.g. “Al-Jazeera” (Qatar) and “Al-Arabia” (UAE) TV companies. It is remarkable that those information resources established in the countries, which are not distinguished by political influence in the region, successfully managed to integrate and take their own place in the international media space (where, as it is known, western resources prevail) and even such global political powers as Russia, China, India and Brazil have not managed to do anything like that.

3 It should be mentioned that the only Russian military base in the region is dislocated in the port of Tartus, Syria.


Return
Another materials of author