From Russia with intentions

Vladimir Putin’s triumphant “mission accomplished” victory lap of Syria is an ominous reminder of the strategic advantage Russia has achieved in the Middle East since Barack Obama prematurely withdrew US troops from Iraq in 2011. In claiming “total victory” for the military force he deployed to save Bashar al-Assad’s murderous regime when it was on the brink of defeat by various rebels, including Islamic State, Mr Putin has shored up a grateful ally whose removal was a goal of US policy. With Assad’s position publicly endorsed by the bear hug Mr Putin gave him on landing in Syria, the Russian leader also has taken charge of the next stage in the Syrian crisis: with Washington not a participant and nowhere in sight, peace talks under Mr Putin’s patronage involving Russia, Turkey and Iran will be held in Astana, Kazakhstan, next week.

Adding to perceptions of the extent to which Russia is back in the Middle East in a way not seen since Soviet times, Mr Putin went from meeting Assad to see Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi — nominally a close US ally but one who has resumed buying weapons from Moscow. Cairo has granted Russia permission to use its military air bases, further expanding Russia’s Middle East footprint. Mr Putin then went to meet Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan — his fourth meeting in two months with the leader of this NATO member state.

So confident is Mr Putin about his supplicants in Damascus that he has ordered a drawdown of the 4000 troops and 50 warplanes sent to Syria. Most will take a cynical view. He has made similar promises before and not fulfilled them. But what is not in doubt is that with the defeat of Islamic State in Syria and Iraq, the growing Russian role in the Middle East symbolised by the gloating “mission accomplished” media releases issued by Moscow (shades of George W. Bush in 2003?) presents the Trump administration and US allies with strategic challenges. In our pages yesterday Rodger Shanahan pointed out the difficulty of a Moscow-Ankara-Tehran axis holding together in the long term because of their differing strategic aims.

Donald Trump has acted boldly to break the deadlock and invigorate US policy on Israel and the Palestinians. But Mr Putin’s presence in Syria shows he will have to do much more across the Middle East if Washington is to succeed in making up for Mr Obama’s neglect of the region. It is imperative that Russia is not allowed to regain the influence it had in Soviet times.