Cynicism and gratitude

Again, Syria is heard-and it is not clear whether Russia goes from victory to victory, or ... Actually, the combination initially looked just brilliantly. We send soldiers to Syria. At this stage - marine infantrymen. First, one company, and a week later, with a small, September 2, two more companies of the Sevastopol Marines unloaded from large landing ships in the 720th point of material and technical support in the Syrian town of Tartus. Thus, the full battalion of the 810th Marine Corps of the Black Sea Fleet was in Syria. At least one company of the 27th motorized rifle brigade from the warm camp in Moscow was noticed in Syria in Syria.

And all this is just wonderful if from the Kremlin point of view. From the Kremlin, the combination looks approximately as follows. We have the problem of Daesh (so Arabic is what we once knew like ISIS-so in order not to advertise even indirectly the word "state" in the self-built name of this extremist organization, in the UK we have now switched to the Arabic name). The Americans and Western Europeans should seriously need to stop Daish (and Russia would also need the caliphs to the Caucasus), but the Westerners cannot send their soldiers, they just got out of Iraq with Afghanistan. To get involved in a new bloody mess, neither the public, nor the politicians have no desire or readiness in the West. And you can’t win the air bombing from the air alone - you can’t kill all cockroaches in the kitchen with a slipper, they will still hide in the cracks.

And then Russia appears - with their soldiers who are already in Syria and potentially ready to fight with Daish. Optimism is added to the West: finally, the European army, decently armed and able to use this weapon, enters into battle with extremists. It still looks more encouraging than the news of the Iranians or fighters of Bashar al-Asad, it is not clear what military skills that have preserved. Here, they will be happy to run to the Russian Supreme Commander -in -Chief to ask there a battalion to throw it up, they will squeeze it out - and sit, sit in the reception room as nice, and the supreme will still think about how many hours to get out of the pool to listen. What is the isolation, when the presidents and premieres with the lowest requests are lining up!

The rhetorical question: is it wise, with the current state of the Russian economy, to get involved in another, second, already war?

Of course, without fanaticism it will be - we will favorably agree to support, to crush the damned extremists. And we are parting - thank God, not to occupy experience, and we are not afraid of difficulties, no one will worry about every killed (and about dozens of killed - too). In the case of successes planned by Moscow, the West is inevitably imbued with gratitude to Russia - and the Kremlin modestly, but firmly asks for a trifle: lifting the sanctions imposed for Ukraine. "The transactional approach in politics" is called "bash for bash", if in a simple way. The decent Western leaders simply will not be able to refuse to refuse to refuse to indecent services to indecent. Gratitude is a terrible force!

Well, the fact that on the way the Russian military can not so much crude, but also significantly reduce the manner of significantly more moderate opponents of Assad supported by the same West - this detail can not be advertised, not protected, right? Assad, at least, will save Moscow-and this is already a personal question, poured in a fan. By the way, the 720th PMTO in Tartus will be securely securely fixed. Tartus is (we will not agree with the Egyptians and will not be in truly reliably reliably and finally in Cyprus) the opportunity to ensure the constant presence of Russian ships in the Mediterranean Sea. The ships go there mainly small ones (there are simply not enough large ones), they cannot hang out for a long time, they need refueling and regular repairs, and there are also not enough tankers and flums. So a reliable item of material and technical support (read: refueling and repair) is necessary in order to have in a pocket located in the Mediterranean Karman that, on occasion, we will be eager to show the same West.

So there was a multi-way: we will slightly help in Syria against Daesh, which we will weaken the threat-the West will be forced to thank the West due to innate nobility-we will request and get a removal or radical weakening of the sanctions-the president will again delightly to burn, consult and look into the mouth-we will save the Assada-Tartus-our western in our way. There will always be something to bite Mediterranean. Seven benefits, but you just need to send troops to Syria! Cynically, of course, but "in politics it is not decent or indecent, in politics it is only profitable or not profitable" (© V.I. Lenin).

Two issues do not allow you to rejoice at the new, about the already approaching success of a multi-way Russian policy. Firstly, and who even said that the United States and the West will definitely thank Moscow? Cynics in the Kremlin, in my opinion, look at the world through pink glasses, believing that these are only the same-scorched cynics. Why are these cynics in the Western European and North -merial capitals, about which the Kremlin to the world, all the ears of Kiselev and Solovyov would suddenly behave like angels in the flesh, full of human gratitude?

And no one tried to figure out how, having received the cost of Russian blood of the Victory over Daish, the Western leaders will simply take and say: “Oh, Vlad, you are just a fantastic! The world will never forget you! But, by the way, how to get along with Donbass and return the Crimea to Ukraine? No? O'Kay, then there is a new round of sanctions! “Thank you, you yourself have come to help yourself, you did not ask you for anything.

Say, an incredible option? Why would he be so incredible? Why do you think that our Supreme can not be tracked on for anything? Suddenly this is just the case when it is spent? Especially if you remember how Afghanistan began in 1979. And this is a transparent parallel with Afghanistan - and there is a second question. After all, the original plan was this: to enter and stand up with garrisons in an arc, blocking the northern third of the country. Due to this, the border of the USSR was covered, but in hostilities, Soviet troops would not participate, simply defending key points in Afghanistan.

The plan lived exactly six months. Then the constant raids on the garrison checkpoints and the supply routes for the Soviet troops forced them to defend them more actively, leaving the strongholds and entering into clashes. It was then that the Afghan war began for the country. So it does not convince me at all that the marines (and, possibly, motorized rifles from the 27th brigade), who were sent, possibly only for the defense of the material and technical support point in Tartus and the Hamimimi air base-that these troops will not be drawn into the bloody massacre very soon. Especially when there is present in many ways - and it is present! - Assad protection element.

The rhetorical question: is it wise, with the current state of the Russian economy, to get involved in another, second, already war?

Igor Sutyan-London Military-Political Expert. Former employee of the Institute of the United States and Canada