What is Putin's agenda w/r/t the proposal for Syria to turn over its chemical weapons?

[geek tragedy]

There seems to be some disagreement on this.

5 votes, 1 pass | Time left: Unlimited
	Protect the role of international law and the UN
	0 (0%)
	Prevent the proliferation and use of chemical weapons
	0 (0%)
	Contain the influence of US power
	2 (40%)
	Protect Assad and buy time for him
	3 (60%)
	1 DU member did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[HappyMe]

1. Protect his buddy Assad.

I'm sure that there is plenty going on re Pooty and Assad. I wouldn't put any money on virtuous, humanitarian reasons from Russia.

[1-Old-Man]

4. I presume you are young.

In time you will come to discover the simple truth that Nations (and national leaders) do not have friends, they only have interests.

[geek tragedy]

5. Sure, Syria is an outpost of what Putin hopes will be the new Russian empire.

Putin would be more than happy to shoot Assad and have him mounted over his fireplace if it advanced his agenda.

[HappyMe]

6. I didn't mean that they are

actually buddies. They are allies, both with a shared agenda and their own agendas.

[1-Old-Man]

14. OK, but tell me something. Just what are those agendas?

Because I just can't see what individual or shared agenda they might have. Both your posting and the one above it allude to these agendas - so what are they?

[HappyMe]

23. Pooty needs somebody in his pocket in the ME.

Assad gets to have big Pooty come to his rescue and keep his own power. Assad gets to keep his CW, which won't break Pooty's heart any. Pooty doesn't want any airfield destroyed. They are both asshole dictators. I am sure that there is a lot more going on with this behind closed doors.

If I knew the whole of their agenda I would be busy at the UN or somewhere, not posting here.

[Daniel537]

29. Here you go

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_naval_facility_in_Tartus

"The Russian naval facility in Tartus is a military installation of the Russian Navy located in the port of the city of Tartus, Syria. Russian official usage classifies the installation as a Material-Technical Support Point (Russian: Пункт материально-технического обеспечения, ПМТО and not a "base". Tartus is the last Russian military facility outside the former Soviet Union,[3] and its only Mediterranean repair and replenishment spot, sparing Russia’s warships the trip back to their Black Sea bases through the Turkish Straits.[4]"

[wandy]

2. Other: Russia has it's own interests in Syria. A long dragged out civil war......

with a mad dog dictator on one side and religion crazed rebel hoards on the other probably messes up Russia's game plan more than it does the US game plan. Toss chemical weapons, world opinion, and our pet profit hungry enforcer, the M.I.C., into the mix and they may have decided that cooling the situation down was a good idea.

[geek tragedy]

3. Seems that he wants Putin to crush the insurgency, then.

Not sure how else this goes away.

[wandy]

11. I might ask He who, but in this confused clusteryouknowwhat.....

I don't think it matters. Their has been so much atypical behavior in this mess that it wouldn't surprise me that if chemical weapons are used again Russia might swat Assad long before the UN or the US can even call a meeting.
It wouldn't even surprise me if Pravda invited President Obama to do an OP on his impressions of Russia.

So far it has been just that strange of a ride.

[cthulu2016]

7. Keep Assad in power is #1

Fuck with America is also on the list, but is not #1

[Douglas Carpenter]

8. to enhance Russia's national interest and influence in the world

[Savannahmann]

9. Option three and four.

To contain the US Power certainly, but as I have been explaining since this started, to protect Assad. Russia has one naval base in a foreign country. Not the dozens we have. Just one.

If you have one, that is a vital strategic asset you can't afford to lose. The United States knows this, and knows that the Russian projection of power in the Med is linked to that base. There Russian Navy ships and subs can resupply, and refuel, and maintain a strategic presence in the Med. If you think that nobody in DC has considered the advantages of a Regime Change in Syria reducing the Russian Presence in the Med you're nuts.

So Putin and Russia have to protect Assad, because their power in the Med is linked to that base, the same way our power is linked to the bases in Italy and Spain. If we were to lose those it would mean we would have to sail into the Med from the UK. Or from Virginia.

The Russians have to go through the Bosporus and that means passing through a NATO ally every time they change the guard. Expensive, and humiliating.

Or they can sail all the way around Europe from the North Sea. Far better to use the Syrian Port and maintain a geopolitical presence in the Med.

So protecting Assad is directly linked to checking the power, and the effort of the United States to back Russia out of the Med.

[geek tragedy]

10. So Russia is screwed if the dictator doesn't win, correct? nt

[Savannahmann]

17. Everybody is screwed if the Dictator doesn't win.

Do you think things will be hunky dory in Syria if the Muslim Brotherhood takes over? Perhaps an alignment between MB, AQ, and Hamas is your idea of a peaceful region.

Israel will be threatened, and Iran will have far more ability to shift weapons to Syria to strike at Tel Aviv.

The Terrorists will have a nation to strike from, and all the while we would be unable to punish Syria because we all know that Terrorists are non state actors.

Look at Libya, it's a disaster that is rapidly becoming the next Somalia. Warlords rule sections, and the Prime Minister is threatening to bomb his own ports because the Berbers are loading the oil onto ships and keeping the money.

Who wins if either of those two options comes true? Or are you of the opinion that somehow the Free Syrian Army will win and establish a Democracy founded in the basis of human rights?

[geek tragedy]

18. No dictator is indispensable, nt

[Savannahmann]

24. In this situation, better than the alternatives.

Unless you think that MB or AQ would run the country better.

[geek tragedy]

25. What's with the lumping in the MB with AQ?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/09/michele-bachmann-911_n_3893575.html

[Savannahmann]

33. Have you been reading anything at all?

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/10/freed-captives-differ-on-claim-syrian-rebels-framed-assad-with-gas-attack/?_r=0

....that two years of bloody, armed conflict had changed the nature of the rebellion. “I was a hostage in Syria, betrayed by the revolution that no longer exists and has become fanaticism and the work of bandits,” he said.

Perhaps he doesn't know what he's talking about.

http://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-syria-fsa-alqaeda-20130912,0,25232.story

Oh they probably don't know either.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57601873/al-qaeda-linked-rebels-take-syrian-christian-village-activists-say/

What do they know?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/31/al-qaeda-egypt_n_3849213.html

Well shoot. Apparently everyone but you knows that Al Qaeda is in Syria, and involved, and invested in the outcome, except you. Why is that?

[Rex]

12. Not a very wide array of opinions.

Russia is doing this to enhance their role in the world.

[geek tragedy]

13. Well, that's a given, I'm presuming Putin is rational.

The question is, which of those four choices does he see as most advantageous to Russia's position in the world?

[Rex]

16. Okay if that is the case then I go with #4.

He is buying time for one of his biggest investors, Assad.

[Douglas Carpenter]

19. I think Mr. Putin is smart enough to realize that reconsolidating centralized power under an Assad

led Baathist regime is unlikely to happen on a national level throughout all of Syria's regions. I suspect he would view it as in Russia's national interest to find a political solution that would leave Russia both with a fair degree of influence in Syria and positioned in a way that makes Russia look like the honest broker for the Middle East.

[geek tragedy]

20. In for the ounce, in for the pound, though.

Hard to see how any post-Assad governance would involve a reward to Russia in the form of a sea port.

[cthulu2016]

15. A cleaner way to phrase it: To keep Syria a Russian ally

Keeping Assad in power is, itself, a means to an end.

If Syria could be stabilized by Assad's public execution and putting Miley Cyrus in power Russia would be fine with that, provided the Miley regime led to a Syria more amenable to serving Russian national interests, for a longer time.

[sarisataka]

21. This...

same as if Russia said they have a perfectly fair and equitable solution to Israel/Palestine, we would step in and demand a leading role. They have their ME allies, we have ours and neither side wants the other to gain more influence.

Edit> Perhaps sphere of influence is more accurate than allies

[Nuclear Unicorn]

22. Check the US while protecting a Russian toady

[Comrade Grumpy]

26. I'm going with a combination of 2, 3, and 4.

He wants to protect his strategic partner, he wants to blunt the influence of the US, and he doesn't want any surprise gas attacks at Sochi.

[geek tragedy]

27. How is a sneak attack on Sochi a threat if Assad keeps his chemical munitions? nt

[MineralMan]

28. Too complex for a simple poll.

And nobody really has any way of knowing this, except the principals.

[blm]

30. Actually Putin doesn't want chem weapons to get into rebels' hands should

Assad fall. Those chem weapons will end up in the hands of rebel forces who see Russia as the enemy. Lavrov has been at the negotiating table with Kerry all year trying to come up with diplomatic solutions for Syria. The way I see it they jumped at the opportunity to leverage Syria into this deal.

You also can't dismiss Putin's ego - he is about to host the Olympics, and no way did he want that glory interrupted by a showdown between US and a brutal dictator he is supporting.

You also can't dismiss the very real likelihood that UN report will include that the chem weapons found were supplied by Russia.

[geek tragedy]

32. That's a very interesting take on it.

The last sentence is particularly interesting, given his claims that it was the rebels who did it. How'd they get the gas?

[JoePhilly]

31. You forget ... "Save Obama's ass".