As can be seen from the contents of this File; The Russian Federation sees itself as the 3rd Roman Empire since 2008. As it gets pampered and stronger, it attempts to swallow the countries in its immediate surroundings without making any distinction between Muslims or non-Muslims. This brutal imperial approach is the historical and traditional policy of the Russian Federation from the Tsarist period. In 2015, under the pretext of supporting Syria (trying to side with the PYD/PKK), it opened bases for itself near our southern borders. Its purpose is to prepare to besiege Turkey from its southern borders and from the Mediterranean coast, by preparing at its naval bases in Syria. Today it is trying to swallow Ukraine. In this regard, it is slaughtering people like a rude killer whale in front of the eyes of the world, most likely by colluding with the western imperial states (USA, UK, France, etc.) and by getting the support of China and Iran. Heaven forbid, I am sure they have no good plans for us either. The reason why we do not attack this day very openly is because we have a very valuable leader and we are relatively stronger than before. It is also highly probable that they will try to attack Turkey (Heaven forbid) together with western opportunists, in an atmosphere of weakness that will be caused by the chaos that will be created by cooperating with the Western imperial countries before the 2023 elections and by making an agreement with the heedless / treacherous opposition parties in our country.  Today, the countries of the west, which do not speak up for the fragmentation and engulfment of Ukraine, and even indirectly encourage it; At that moment of weakness for Turkey, there is a possibility that they will attack our country from all quarters, by provoking the Greeks from the Aegean Sea, the PYD / PKK from our south, and by provoking Armenians and Iran by Russia. Our state and our people should be prepared for a general offensive-defense operation accordingly. These infidels are united and became one. The reopening of Hagia Sophia for worship disturbed them very much. They are aware that Turkey can no longer stop a Treaty of Lausanne that registers our rights.

THE REASONS FOR RUSSIA'S INTERVENTION IN SYRIA AND THE SIZE OF THE INTERVENTION

The developments in Syria since March 2011 have been followed with concern by the international community. Thousands of people have lost their lives in the conflict so far. As the images of the Syrian army's military operations targeting civilians and the clashes between the opposition and army units were reflected in the media, the reactions against the Assad regime began to increase.

In addition to the human tragedy brought about by the chaos, the possibility of conflicts crossing the borders of the country and dragging the East into a multilateral war focuses the attention of the international public on Syria. The Assad regime in Syria, with its harsh and ruthless attitude towards the events that have been going on for about four and a half years, murdering hundreds of thousands of its own people; Although it has lost its legitimacy to a large extent due to the fact that it has made nearly 5 million people refugees, it continues to survive with the support of Russia, China and Iran.

In order to get down to the reasons of Russia's reckless de facto intervention in Syria, first of all, the strategic concept of “Theories of Global Domination” needs to be explained.

Theories of Global Domination [1]

If we look at the strategies of the world's great states to be a super and effective power, we see that in 1971 the theories of domination were classified and gathered under two main headlines.    

1. Theories based on Physical Geography:

1. Land Domination Theory
2. Rimland Theory

1.1. Land Domination Theory:

According to this theory developed by the British Geopolitician Halford Mackinder, Eastern Europe and the Siberian Region form the “Heartland” of the World.

The area from the Balkans around the Heartland to China is the Inner Rim Crescent (Rimland) belt. The remaining America-Africa-Australia-Japan line is considered as the Outer Rim Crescent (Satellites of the World Island).

According to this theory; A state that dominates Eastern Europe dominates the “Heartland”. Whoever rules the “Heartland” first rules the Inner Rim Crescent, and then the Outer Rim Crescent, that is, the whole world.

According to Mackinder, the world's land and seas should be considered as a whole. And the striking force is the Land Forces. However, the state that is strong both on land and at navy is the most powerful state.

Mackinder defines “Heartland” as a vast expanse of land stretching from the flat, icy coasts of Siberia to the angry steep coasts of Balochistan and Iran. Mackinder argued that either a Russian-German alliance or a Sino-Japanese Empire to seize Russian territory would ensure global domination. This view was especially accepted by Hitler and was put into practice with the World War II.

As a result, the Asian continent cannot be thought of as the heart of the world, because it is close to the North Pole from the Siberian steppes and is not suitable for human life. Because, a place called the Heart must be in a safe and protected center.

1.2. Rimland Theory:

The founder of the Rimland theory, Spykman, is also the founder of the USA's containment policies.

According to this theory, the dominant power is not the Heartland, but the countries on the Outer Rim Crescent (ie. America - Africa - Australia - Japan line). The power that dominates the area on the Inner Rim Crescent (the area from the Balkans to China) dominates Eurasia. The power that dominates Eurasia determines the fate of the whole world.

As it is known, the US policies against the Soviets during the Cold War were based on the policies of Containment and Deterrence. After 1947, the implementation of the “Truman Doctrine” to support Turkey and Greece, the establishment of organizations such as NATO, aim to integrate the countries on the Inner Rim Crescent.  

2. Theories Based on Force:

1. Naval Domination Theory
2. Air Domination Theory

2.1. Naval Domination Theory:

Although the US admiral Alfred MAHAN (1841-1914) was not a geopolitician, he came to the conclusion that the struggle in the world is usually for the control of the seas. As a result of this, he put forward and defended the thesis that “The key to global domination is under the control of sea routes”. 

With only the Land Forces, only a certain amount of land can be occupied all over the world. However, it is necessary to dominate the seas in order to seize overseas points and regions to establish global domination or to establish great empires, and to maintain the connection between them and the homeland.

Mahan, in his theory, gave more chances to states that dominate the oceans such as England and the USA than to powerful states on land such as Russia and Germany. He argued that the fate of a war between great states could be determined in the seas, due to the freedom of movement provided by the naval power to the parties in the military sense. For this reason, he emphasized that his country and the USA should attach importance to establishing an open naval fleet. Mahan's views were met with interest and applied by the soldiers and statesmen of many countries, especially the USA, both during his lifetime and afterwards. The fact that the USA has formed overseas fleets with aircraft carriers, that these fleets are in international waters, and that they are transferred to the regions where it will intervene militarily is an indication of its adoption of this theory.

2.2. Air Domination Theory:

According to this Theory, in order for a nation to have global domination, it must have a powerful air fleet that excels in the air. The strongest defenders of this view are the USA and the UK. The USA and the UK have air bases in the Mediterranean and the Indian Ocean to control the entire Middle East and aircraft carriers in constant motion. This practice began in the World War I. It has been applied in Vietnam and has had the opportunity to be applied in the regional crises in the Middle East, in which the USA is also involved, and in the Iraq - Kuwait crises.

According to analyst John COLLİNS, when the theory is examined in the space dimension, the one who rules the space surrounding the earth, rules the planet Earth; the one who rules the Moon rules the space surrounding the earth.

The expansion of the air dimension into space is a development that has occurred in recent years. It is used for both observation, communication and intelligence as well as placing anti-ballistic (nuclear) systems in space. Since these are extremely expensive systems, they were an important factor in the collapse of the USSR in the armanent race with the USA. The project of “establishing a base on the Moon and sending people to Mars” under the name of “Vision for Space Exploration” announced by former US President George W. Bush in 2004 can be characterized within this context.    

1. EVALUATION OF THEORIES ON DOMINATION:

In particular, after the World War II, the USA implemented the Air and Naval Domination theories in order to control the geography on the Inner Rim Crescent. The most important geography on the Inner Rim Crescent is the Middle East. Because the Middle East is very important for America in terms of its energy resources and controlling the energy resources in the Caspian Basin. 

Again, especially to reach this geography, the United States maintains naval, air and land bases in Europe, Turkey and the Middle East. America has 730 land, naval and air bases in 50 countries around the world. At these bases, highly advanced warships, warplanes and Air Tanker aircraft that enable long-range flights are deployed. For example, the Diego Garcia base, which the USA uses to keep Asia under control, plays a critical role in the Gulf and Afghanistan wars; It is a very important air and naval base, where air operations are carried out in the invasion of Iraq and also a global surveillance and monitoring center. 

As a result, it is inappropriate to accept a view based on only one force as the best theory. Land-Air-Naval forces are complementary to each other.  It does not seem possible for a power that wants to establish Global Domination with only land or naval power or only air power. This is only possible with an effective coordination between the three forces. So far, only the USA has been able to achieve this.

Central Domination Theory: [2] This theory is based on physical geography and was developed by Prof. Dr. Ramazan ÖZEY. According to this theory, the “Anatolian Peninsula” forms the World Castle. The Balkans and the Middle East surrounding this castle form the inner circle of the castle. Other landmasses form the outer circle. A nation that holds Anatolia will rule the inner circle, namely the Middle East and the Balkans. A nation that rules the Middle East and the Balkans will rule the world. In the determination of the World Heartland, the “Anatolian Peninsula” is suitable for all criteria, both geographically and geopolitically.

         BECAUSE:

1. The “Anatolian Peninsula” is located at the crossroads of the Asian, European and African continents.
2. The “Anatolian Peninsula” is at the center of powerful states such as the USA, China, Russia and Japan.
3. Istanbul and Çanakkale Straits gives the “Anatolian Peninsula” a strategic protection advantage.
4. Since the three sides of Turkey are surrounded by seas, there is ease of access to all continents. Physically, it is in a central location in the world, so it is easy to reach the surrounding countries by air, too.
5. The “Anatolian Peninsula” is adjacent to the Middle East and the Caspian basin, which has great energy resources.
6. The “Anatolian Peninsula” is only 40 miles from Cyprus, which is a giant aircraft carrier anchored at the junction of Asian and African sea routes.

Accordingly, in order for Russia to become a global power, its presence in the Mediterranean, which is the intersection point of international trade, is essential. Until 1917, when the Russian Empire collapsed, they tried every way to be permanent in the Mediterranean and to have Istanbul and the Straits, but they were partially successful in this regard.

BACKGROUND OF TSARIST RUSSIA'S MEDITERRANEAN POLICY ^[3] 

RUSSIAN FEDERATION ^[4]

It is a state with different communities belonging to around a hundred nationalities within its borders. The country is located; the Arctic Sea to the north; the Pacific (Great) Ocean to the east; Estonia, Lithuania, Belarus, Latvia, Ukraine, Moldavia, Baltic Sea to the west; Kazakhstan, Mongolia, China, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Caspian Sea, North Korea, Black Sea to the south. It ranks 1st among the world countries in terms of land and 5th in terms of population.

Country Name …………………………………………… Russian Federation

Capital City ………………………………………………… Moscow

Population …………………………………………………. 145,300,000

Surface Area …………………………………………….. 17,075,400 km2

Official Language ………………………………………………. Russian

Religion ……………………………………………………… Christianity

Local Currency ……………………………………………… Ruble

1-The Basis of Russia's Mediterranean Policy

The known history of Russia begins with the East Slavic tribes who entered Russia from the west in the 5th century. Before 864, when the Cyrillic script was invented, there is little information about the history of the Russians. The first Russian state was founded in the 9th century by the Scandinavians. The center of the state was Novgorod and Kyiv. The Russians that emerged around Kyiv were not a foreign nation to waters and seas. It is known that the Russians came to the Mediterranean for the purpose of trade and robbery as early as the 10th century. The Russians came to the Byzantine lands for trade and robbery from the time they made history, and they knew the region well. The adoption of the Orthodox faith by the Russians in the 10th century and the political marriages made strengthened their ties with Byzantium.

The Russians could not go south for various reasons between the Centuries of XI-XVI. The Kievan Rus', the first great state founded by the Russians, was destroyed by the Mongol invasion in the 13th century. The Grand Duchy of Moscow, which was founded in the 14th century, developed over time and started to emerge under the rule of Moscow principalities and grand dukes, and in 1480 the country was freed from the dominance of the Golden Horde State. His relations with the Ottoman Empire began in the 15th century. Mehmed the Conqueror (1451-1481), who conquered Istanbul and put an end to the Eastern Roman State, also called "Byzantine"; He attached the Crimean Khanate in the south of the Grand Duchy of Moscow to the Ottoman State as a privileged principality, and assigned him the task of making conclusive and daunting raids against the Muscovites every summer instead of taxes. The Russians began to wake up against the Turks, thanks to the cardinal and priestly delegations sent by the Papacy. The Grand Duchy of Moscow united and became the Tsardom of Russia in the 16th century, the Tsarist period began. Ivan the Terrible was proclaimed first tsar in 1547. Thus, the Russian tsars considered themselves the heirs of Eastern Rome. This Tsardom became stronger in the 18th century and formed the Russian Empire. But the Orthodox Russians thought that Moscow was the “Third Rome” and that they would one day acquire the lands stretching from Istanbul to Rome. Upon the marriage of Grand Duke of Moscow Ivan III to the Byzantine princess Sophia Palaiologina, the opinion that Moscow would be a “successor” to Byzantium began to be developed in the circles of the Principality of Moscow; this view was later turned into a purely political creed in the style of “Moscow-Third Rome”.

This was the basis of the Mediterranean policy of Tsarist Russia. Historical, religious, economic and political reasons were the basis of the Tsarist Russia's Mediterranean policy. The Ottoman seizure of Byzantine lands was something unacceptable for the Russians.

Russian Tsar Peter the Great (1689-1725) was the first person to realize that after his accession to the throne, it is necessary to have large ports and go to warm seas for trade. Because Peter the Great understood that it is of primary importance to open up to warm seas and develop trade in order for his state to develop and to dominate the world. In order to achieve this, he believed that the Ottoman Empire, which was the absolute ruler of the Black Sea and the Bosphorus, should be destroyed and the geographical regions that it owned should be taken over by Russia.

As a result of the Russo-Turkish wars, Russia became a geopolitical and geostrategic actor in the Black Sea. Russia has taken its place in the European balance of power and has transformed from regional land power to naval power. ^[4] The biggest dream of Russia, which turned into a naval power, was to have the Straits and the Mediterranean. At the basis of the desire of the Russians to go to the warm seas was the desire to have Istanbul. The navy of Tsarist Russia was officially established in 1696. As predicted, the Russian navy was created by Peter the Great to protect the Sea of Azov. Thus, the Turks conduced to the Russians having a navy. About a century later, Czarina Catherine the Great completed Peter's policy, which had geopolitical and strategic depth.

Peter the Great, who strengthened Russia, left a great historical political legacy to his successors to go to the warm seas. One of his successors, Catherine the Great, succeeded in sending the Russian navy to the Mediterranean for the first time. As Russia became stronger by subjugating the Turkish and Slavic peoples around it, the desire to go to warm seas increased. While Peter the Great proved that the Tsarist Russia could be a world empire, Catherine the Great also proved that the Russians could exist in the Mediterranean.

This expansion policy of Russia was based on eliminating the Ottoman Empire or weakening the Ottoman Empire as much as possible. Russia's idea of sending a navy to the Mediterranean was primarily based on the strategy of encircling the Ottoman Empire. Of course, Tsarist Russia had reasons such as going out to the Mediterranean to secure its own position in its relations with the old-world countries, strengthening its economy by ensuring free shipping between the Black Sea and the Mediterranean, and being effective in the Balkans. By going to the Mediterranean, Russia proved that it is a state with naval power. Although many gains were made by staying in the Mediterranean until the collapse of Tsarist Russia, they could not be successful in owning the Bosphorus and Istanbul, which were their real dream.

The relevant part of the Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca, signed between the Ottoman Empire and the Russian Tsardom in 1774, is given in Article 11; “The ships of the two parties will be able to move freely in all seas for the purpose of trade. Russian trade ships will be able to pass from the Mediterranean to the Black Sea and from the Black Sea to the Mediterranean easily. The Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca strengthened the position of the Russians in the Mediterranean and allowed them to make new moves in the region in the following years.

In 1798, the Russian navy was involved in the events in Italy, with its navy, against France, which occupied Egypt together with the Ottoman Empire. The Turkish-Russian alliance in the Mediterranean, which Akdes Nimet Kurat describes as “strange”, stemmed from the strengthening of the French in the region. While the Ottomans needed the help of the Russians against the French, Russia was worried that the Mediterranean would turn into a French lake and sought a base to stay in the Mediterranean.

We can say that the Russians achieved their goal of being permanent in the Mediterranean. Kadirbayev on this issue: It is said that the presence of the Russian navy in the Mediterranean disappeared only for a few years after the Crimean War of 1853-56.

At the beginning of the 19th century, the Ottoman Empire started to pass the Russian navies through the Straits without any problems, so the legal status of the Straits changed. Another innovation experienced by the Russians in this period was the passage of the Russian navy registered to the Baltic navy to the Black Sea. As a result of the strengthening of the French in the Mediterranean, a Russian-Turkish alliance was formed in 1805. Thanks to this alliance, Russia further strengthened its influence on the Mediterranean and the Ottoman Empire. Alexander Borissowitsch Schirokorad says, “According to the 4th secret article of the agreement, the Ottoman sultan accepted the occupation of the Greek islands by the Russian army”.

The San Stefano Peace Treaty, signed after the 1877-1878 Turkish-Russian War, was transforming Russia into a Mediterranean country. “Through Bulgaria reaching the Aegean Sea, Russia would also be able to become a Mediterranean State. If the Doğubayazıt City and the Eleşkirt Plain were to remain under the control of the Russians, the way to the Iskenderun Bay would have been opened for the Russians. Akdes Nimet Kurat states that there is a direct link between the desire of the Russians, who could not seize the Straits, to sail to the Gulf of Iskenderun, and their interest in the Armenian issue in the following years: “The most important factor in Russia's interest in the Armenians was the desire to go to the Mediterranean. If Russia, which constantly encounters some obstacles in reaching the Mediterranean through the “Straits”, obtains the territory of Armenia, it would be possible to reach the Mediterranean via the Gulf of Iskenderun and a large Russian naval base could be established in Iskenderun”. We can see the attempts of the Russians to enter the Gulf of Iskenderun as a part of their policy of staying in the Mediterranean by trying every possible way.

2-The effects of Russia's policy of landing on warm seas on the Ottoman State ^[5]

Russia is a state consists of lands. For this reason, throughout the entire period in history, he generally tried to follow a policy of landing in warm seas. In order to follow this policy, Russia had to break up the Ottoman Empire so that it could reach the Mediterranean. Russia used the phenomena of nationalism and freedom that emerged as a result of the French Revolution in order to break up the Ottoman state and revolted the minorities within the Ottoman state. But the independent Balkan states did not allow Russia to approach the warm seas. In other words, Russia broke up the Ottoman state, but could not swallow its small pieces.
Russia did not give up on its goal and for this purpose, it started to provoke the Armenians in the Ottoman lands in order to pass through the Caucasus and Eastern Anatolia and come to the Mediterranean. As a result of this attitude of Russia, Armenians began to contradict the Ottoman state administration. During the World War I, Russia provoked the Armenians, so Russia was feeling the pulse of the Ottoman Empire in order to go into the warm seas.

Rimskiy-Korsakov, ^[6] in his article entitled “Why Russia Needs a Navy?”; He mentioned that Russia had been fighting the Ottomans for many years and they could not strike the final fatal blow, and he insistently tried to prove that Russia made a mistake by attacking the Ottoman Empire from the land, and that what should be done was to attack Istanbul, the heart of the Ottoman Empire, via the Mediterranean, with the navy. Chernyavskiy, on the other hand, states that Russia made serious attempts to seize Istanbul and the Straits in 1775, 1895 and 1917, but these did not happen for various reasons; but he states that this does not mean that the Russians have given up on these ambitions, that Russia has postponed it for a more appropriate time. 

3-Post-Cold War Russian Federation ^[7]

As it is known, the Soviet Union, which was accepted as one of the two superpowers of the world together with the United States of America during the Cold War period, was disintegrated in 1991 and 15 new countries emerged from this bloc. These countries later formed the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) in order to ensure the continuation of their cooperation, but they did not transfer their sovereign rights to this institution as in the Soviet Union. The greatest heir of the Soviets is naturally the Russian Federation. After Russia lost significant power, its first years were in complete chaos and could not recover. The loss of such a great country had a devastating effect on the people and the state. It also had a hard time keeping up with the regime change. But this is not the case for other countries that left the Soviet Union. When Russia started to recover, it started to claim the former Soviet geography. Although the Soviets no longer exist, Russia tried to maintain its influence in these countries. It is possible to remember various examples of this. It has begun to regain its influence, primarily within itself. They organized various military operations in Chechnya and tried to erase the opposition against Russia there. Another example we remember is the South Ossetian problem in Georgia. This problem is actually an intimidation given by Russia to Georgia, which applied to NATO. Russia attacked Georgia in 2008 and recognized its independence by securing South Ossetia from Georgia. Thus, they tried to consolidate their influence over Georgia.

The Caucasus and Central Asia region are also very important for Russia. Because the countries here have a common history thanks to the Soviet Union. It works to ensure that these countries do not side with the West or even Turkey in any way. In Central Asian countries, the agreements with Russia have strengthened Russia's influence here, and they work together with these countries in organizations such as Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS).

Russia started to get stronger especially with the coming to power of Vladimir Putin and tried to create stability in its region. In particular, it works for Russia to become a superpower, and for this, it keeps the work on the former Soviet geography tight. The idea of creating an Eastern Bloc again is dominant. Russia does not have any alliance with the West anyway. For example, it is not a member of NATO and the European Union (EU). In the Eurasian geography, it is trying to draw its own sphere of influence and even this line to the Middle East. In the Eurasian geography, there is the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which is a security organization like NATO. Russia and China established the SCO to prevent any Western country from creating a sphere of influence in the Eurasian geography. For this reason, it would be meaningful to call this established structure as the Eastern Bloc. The spheres of influence of China and Russia are palpable in the Middle East, and they want to expand their sphere of influence. For this, they aim to remove the Western countries in the Middle East from the region and they want to take over this seat that they vacated. These countries have two important allies in the Middle East, one is Iran and the other is Syria.

Russia and China, especially these days, are trying to keep Syria under their control. Because in a possible Middle East war, Russia and China will have two fronts. They have their attention on this issue as they foresee this critical situation. And they follow the Middle East policy closely.

Even though Russia actually tried to appear strong or made a policy in this direction, it still could not reach the power of the Soviets. This is evident by the people living there. Most of the people miss the Soviet Union. Some reasons of this are easily understandable. The most important was the socialist regime in the Soviets. The socialist one-party regime may not be democratic, or it may oppress the people, and the people may not enjoy their freedom to the fullest, but the state has undertaken the duty of serving the people for the welfare of the people. The Soviet economic system or social system is the one that the Russians especially want again. Because the state had more responsibility on the people, but the current capitalist regime in Russia is the opposite.

Recently, the 60th anniversary of Stalin's death was commemorated in Russia with a ceremony. The fact that some groups there openly expressed that they are not satisfied with the current situation of Russia and that they miss the Soviets, is an indication that Russia is still not as strong as the Soviets. Because if a country intends to be strong, it must first of all make its people happy. If the people are not happy and miss the old, then this state should not pretend to be a strong state. According to a poll by the Russian Center for Opinion Research (Leveda), 49% of Russian people say that Stalin played an important role in Russian history. Even this should actually be taken as a warning by the Russian government. The longing of its people for the Soviet regime shows that they are not satisfied with the Russian Federation administration. In particular, the longing of the most ruthless leader of the Soviets is another remarkable issue.

The coming years are important for the Eurasian geography, especially for Russia. If Russia wants to be strong, it should not follow a path like the Soviet Union or the way it used to do. It must build a path that it will create entirely itself and that will illuminate the path before it. Then it will be easy for the people to forget about the Soviets.

4-Russia settles to the Mediterranean Permanently ^[8]  

In the news made on the basis of the Russian Itar-Tass agency on 13.09.2008, the Russian administration reported that a ship of Russia in the Black Sea had begun to restore the Tartus port on the Mediterranean coast of Syria. This development was interpreted as a sign of a new cooperation between Russia and Syria and the effort of the Russians to reach the Mediterranean again. Russian officials, on the other hand, stated that the base will be permanent. Relations with Syria, Russia's strongest ally in the Middle East during the Cold War, weakened after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, but Russia continued to sell weapons to Syria. They stated that the naval commanders of the two countries “met in Moscow and discussed ways to increase mutual trust and increase mutual understanding between the two countries”. A senior commander of the Russian naval forces said that the renovation works in Tartus were a sign that Russia wanted to stay in the region for a long time. Russian Ambassador to Damascus, Igor Belyev, said in a statement at the end of August that the Russian navy was “already patrolling the region, but that Russia's permanent presence in the Mediterranean is something new”.

The closest way of the Russians to the Mediterranean is from the Black Sea, where they have a strong navy. However, after the Georgia problem, NATO influence increased even more. The Russians were also disturbed by this situation and complained that the number of NATO ships in the region was more than it should have been.

It was noteworthy that this move of the Russians came at the same time as the tension between the USA and Russia after the South Ossetia war. This move of Russia was also interpreted as an effort of the USA to increase relations with its rivals around the world and to establish new alliances.

Russian military experts state that the port of Tartus will be an important support for operations in the Mediterranean. Speaking to the Russian Interfax agency, Aduard Baltin, former commander of Russia's Black Sea Fleet; “This is more advantageous to have such a facility there than to pull the ships back to their home bases in the Mediterranean” and “Tartus is a place of great geopolitical importance as it is the only base of this type outside of Russia's borders”. In accordance with the agreement signed with Damascus in 1971, the Soviet Union established a maintenance and supply base in Tartus. However, the agreement came to an end when the Soviet Union collapsed. Today, there are 3 floating piers, a floating repair shop, warehouses, barracks and other facilities, one of which is operational, at the base in Tarsus.

5-Special Relations between Russia and Syria ^[9]

Russia's extraordinary efforts to support the Syrian regime and its determined policy are striking. In 2011, Russia was in favor of solving the problem in Syria without the use of force. When the events first began, it expected the international community to be patient with the Damascus administration's reforms. In the conflicts between the opposition and the government, it first called them for dialogue between both sides.  It worked as a mediator between the opposition and the administration. Syrian opposition groups held talks with Russian officials in Moscow several times. At the last meeting held in November 2012, Russian Foreign Minister S. Lavrov met with the opposition. Russia has often accused the West of being unilateral and politicizing the current problem. According to Moscow, the West wanted to overthrow the regime and replace it with a democratic government by supporting the opposition, focusing only on the government's operations, but ignoring the actions of the opposition groups. Most importantly, according to Moscow, if Assad was to leave, it had to be with the free will of the Syrian people, not an intervention by other countries. International organizations such as the UN, NATO, Arab League and OIC should have tried to establish a dialogue between the opposition and the government. Any sanctions against Syria would aggravate the problem rather than solve it. Russia strongly opposes the repetition of the same scenario applied in Libya in Syria. The veto decisions taken in the UN Security Council are also an indication about it.

There are many reasons behind Russia's resolute support for Syria at all costs. In order to understand Russia's policy in the Syrian crisis, first of all, it is necessary to touch on the special relationship between Russia and Syria. The relations between the two countries have not only economic but also political and strategic importance. Syria is a relatively independent country compared to the West. There is a long history of relations between the two countries. It is the starting point for Russia in the Mediterranean. As long as Russia's political and economic relations with all the countries in the Middle East region develop and increase, Kremlin will not give up close relations with its only ally in the region, Syria. Among the Arab countries, Syria is the country that gives Russia the biggest political support. In all these respects, the relations developed for Russia with Syria are different from the relations developed with Saudi Arabia or other Arab countries. ⁽¹⁾ In order to reveal why it is different, it is necessary to look at this relationship from different angles.

a. Traditional Affinity ^[10]

Diplomatic relations between the USSR and Syria began in 1946. ⁽²⁾ In 1954, the Syrian Arab Republic, which came under the control of Arab nationalism and the Socialist-leaning Ba'ath Party, became the most important partner of the USSR in the Middle East. Due to the special relationship established in accordance with the Cold War atmosphere, important developments in the Middle East brought the two countries closer to each other with each passing year. Military cooperation agreements were signed between them. In addition to military aid, economic aid for development began to flow to Syria. Developing relations made Syria a satellite of Moscow. By the 1980s, the Soviet Union was in a position to meet almost all of Syria's military and economic needs. Moscow has always played a key role in maintaining Syria's position against Israel and in Lebanon. Syria also always responded seriously to the support of the USSR. In military, a wide range of relations have been established, from equipping the Syrian army with Soviet weapons to the recruitment of thousands of Soviet military experts in the Syrian army. Due to the political and economic developments in the 1980s, the USSR's inclination to its own problems negatively affected its relations with Syria, along with other countries with which it had relations.

The new international order that emerged after the Cold War greatly affected the relations between the two countries. Right after the end of the Cold War period, the Russian Federation, the heir of the USSR, struggled with some political, economic and social problems caused by the harsh transition period in the 1990s and quickly withdrew from the regions where it was active in the past. The Middle East was one of them. While Syria was trying to adapt to the post-Cold War era, on the other hand, it was trying not to lose its closest ally. The main period of revival in Russia-Syria relations was when Vladimir Putin came to power in Russia. Russian foreign policy, which entered a recovery period with Putin, began to be closely interested in the regions that were of interest during the Soviet period but had to leave in the 1990s. In this process, which we can call “Russia's returns”, there could not be a more suitable place for a return to the Middle East than Syria, which traditionally has good relations.

In terms of demonstrating its presence in the Middle East, Russia again resorted to the old and well-known method, choosing to tighten relations with Syria:

• On April 16, 2001, Syrian Foreign Minister Farouk al-Sharaa visited Moscow and met with Putin.
• Y. Primakov, who visited the Middle East countries with a diplomatic mission, delivered a letter containing Putin's message to improve relations to Syrian President Bashar Assad in May 2001.
• In July 2003, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, Igor Ivanov, during his visit to Damascus, conveyed his wishes to rekindle relations and invited the Syrian President to Moscow.
• Bashar Assad paid a four-day official visit to Russia in January 2005. His visit was extremely positive. The most important result was that a large part of Syria's $13.4 billion debt, most of which stemmed from the purchase of military equipment, was written off by Moscow administration.
• Syria did not leave it unanswered. The Syrian administration, which has approached the Chechnya issue as Russia's internal problem from the very beginning, supported its traditional partner by openly sided with Russia during the Russia-Georgia war in August 2008.
• With Medvedev's visit on May 10-11, 2010, a Russian president made official contacts to Syria for the first time, which was very important in terms of revealing the importance of relations.

b. Principal Concerns

Traditionally, good relations with this country and economic interests alone have not been effective in Russia's approach to the Syrian crisis. For example, Moscow Carnegie Institute director Dmitry Trenin states that Moscow's support for Assad cannot be explained solely by the solidarity of authoritarian regimes or the idea of protecting Russia's economic interests in Syria. According to Trenin, the experience gained recently in Libya, the doubts about the Syrian opposition and the skepticism towards America's theses are effective behind the support. ⁽³⁾

Russia is trying with all its might not to let the Assad regime fall. While following this policy, they often state that they are not in favor of the regime in Syria or Assad in particular, and that they are trying to prevent the spread of violence and foreign intervention in the country. However, these efforts of Russia do not stop the conflicts in the country. Moreover, doubts arise about the sincerity and objectivity of Russia's “dove of peace” role against the “hawks”. Russia first refers to the principle of respect for the territorial integrity of countries and non-interference in their internal affairs, according to UN rules. They do not trust the West because of the policy followed regarding Libya. On the other hand, they hope that the position of protecting the peace and preventing the West against foreign intervention will be supported by many non-Western countries, thus forming a counter bloc. Most importantly, the Syrian crisis is important for Russia as it is the only international problem that shows the international community that the problem cannot be solved without it. That's why the Russian ruling elite thinks that the crisis has given the country an opportunity to show its effect in the international arena. ⁽⁴⁾

c. Geopolitical Concerns

According to the perception of the Russian ruling elite, what is actually happening in the Middle East is quite easy to understand. According to this understanding, Washington pushed its former ally Mubarak aside to preserve its influence in Egypt. They started a war to protect the oil deals in Libya. Since the US Navy's 5th Fleet was there, they allowed Saudi Arabia to interfere in the events in Bahrain. Now the United States is trying to overthrow Assad, Iran's sole partner in the Arab world. War is undesirable because a war between the US and Iran could destabilize the North Caucasus and Central Asian regions. ⁽⁵⁾ Russia thinks that if the situation in Syria gets out of control, it will lead to a disintegrated Syria and then a crisis that engulfs the entire Middle East. It tries to create a balance by supporting the Shiite bloc formed by the Russian Federation, Syria and Iran, against the Sunni bloc, which is made up of countries such as Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, which also receives the support of the West. According to Yu. B. Sheglovin from the Middle East Studies Institute, the end of the Assad regime will further destabilize the Sunni-Shiite balance in the region against the Shiites. This balance is the guarantee of stability in the region and is an obstacle for the West to monopolize vital geopolitical decisions in the region. ⁽⁶⁾ If Syria falls, it will be Iran's turn and the balance in the Middle East will be completely upset. This will mean that Russia's duty in the Middle East region will become even more difficult. It is as if Russia and the United States are secretly preparing for the final battle over who will dominate Damascus. ⁽⁷⁾ Moreover, if Russia loses Syria, its last remaining partner in the Middle East, it risks being left out of the Middle East peace process.

d. Arms Trade

Another reason behind Russia's policy on Syria is that Syria is an important market for the Russian arms industry. The arms trade between Syria and Russia started in 1956. Until 2000, Russia sold about 26 billion dollars of weapons to Syria, and 90% of the Syrian army's weapons were Soviet and Russian products. ⁽⁸⁾ The declining military-technical relations regarding Russia-Syria began to be revived with the agreements signed in 1994 and 1996. Between 1991 and 2002, Russia sold 9.1 billion dollars worth of weapons to the Middle East countries. Of this, $1.2 billion (13%) was taken by Syria, which is 55% of the amount Syria received in the period mentioned. ⁽⁹⁾  Behind the debt write-off in 2005 were Russia's new arms sales deals to Syria. ⁽¹⁰⁾ As a matter of fact, Russia signed an arms sales agreement with Syria worth 4.7 billion dollars between 2007 and 2010. ⁽¹¹⁾

In terms of Syria, Russia remains the largest source of arms supply, since most of its army, whose officers are still trained by Russian experts, consists of Soviet Russian-made weapons. From the perspective of Russia, Syria is a very important market for the arms industry. At the same time, Russia has the opportunity to closely monitor the army, which is the most important pillar of the regime, through the military training given to the Syrian army. Just like Libya, after a possible military operation, Syria's turning its direction from Russia to Western countries in the purchase of weapons will mean both a great loss of market and a loss of prestige for Russia.

e. Economic Interests

The biggest challenge facing Russia in the Middle East is its inability to have an economic presence in the region. While the trade volume between the two countries was around 1 billion dollars in 1991, it decreased to 88 million dollars in 1993. ⁽¹²⁾ On April 15, 1993, an intergovernmental protocol on cooperation in commercial, economic and technical fields was signed in order to restore relations between the two countries. Syria's debt has been a problem between the two countries for a long time. On July 6, 1999, Hafez Al-Assad visited Moscow. The issue of Syria's debt brought the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Defense against the Ministry of Finance. As a result, the write-off of a significant part of the debt benefited bilateral relations in general and commercial-economic relations in particular.

In 2008, the trade volume between the two countries reached up to 1.5 billion dollars.⁽¹³⁾ Large Russian companies operate in the Syrian market, especially in the energy sector. Although arms trade is also included, the concern that Russia-Syria trade/economic relations in general will be damaged after a possible international operation or developing events and that they will be removed from the market is one of the reasons forcing Moscow to follow a pro-Syrian policy. The inability of Russian companies to gain market share from Iraq, another Middle East country with which it had very close relations, after the 2nd Gulf War, has not been erased from Russia's memory. Russia, which followed an impartial policy during the events in Egypt and opted to abstain rather than veto a UN vote on Libya, has been deeply detrimental. It has lost projects carried out in many areas such as transportation with Libya, arms trade and energy investments. Excluded from the Libyan market, just as it was in the Iraqi market, Russia is definitely not willing to experience the same issue in Syria.

f. Port of Tartus

One of the reasons that makes Syria important for Russia is the port of Tartus. It is unclear what the status of Tartus will be after the escalation of turmoil in Syria and a possible regime change. Tartus is important for Russia in many ways. During the Cold War, the Soviet Union had naval bases in various parts of the world such as Vietnam, Cuba, Egypt and Syria. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Russian Federation, which experienced various economic and political problems, had to close these bases for some reasons such as lack of financing and lack of need. Today, Russia has two remote naval bases under its control. The first of these is the fully equipped Sevastopol base, leased by Russia from Ukraine until 2042. This base is currently used by Russia's Black Sea Navy. The second is the logistics and maintenance base in Syria's Tartus Port, which was given to Russia with the agreement signed between the USSR and Syria in 1971. Tartus is Syria's second largest and most important port after Latakia. Russia signed a new agreement with the Syrian government on the use of this port in 2005 and guaranteed to use this port for a long time. The fact that Russia has given up 70% of its receivables from Syria has played a big role in Syria's reopening of this place to Russia.

The Tartus base is essentially a base of Russia's Black Sea Navy. It provides logistics services such as repair-maintenance, storage and supply to Russian warships serving in the Mediterranean, Gulf of Aden and Indian Ocean. In fact, it is not exactly a military naval base. Its availability is also open to be discussed. However, an important feature of the port is that it has rail and road connections with other parts of Syria. In this respect, it is very important for Russia. Russia has been carrying out activities to renovate and increase the depth of the port since 2009. Russia, which wants to show its strength in the Mediterranean, sometimes sends warships in this region.

Although it is sometimes claimed that Tartus is not very important for Russia or that the port is useless, in reality the port is more important than expected for Russia. If the special situation of the Sevastopol base is not taken into account, Tartus is currently Russia's only military-purpose naval base outside the country's territory. Thanks to the Tartus base, Russia can continue to show up in the Mediterranean and the other seas around the world. Thanks to this base, Russia makes its presence felt to other important naval powers in the Mediterranean and shows the world that it is one of the great powers in the Mediterranean. This base also reminds Russia nostalgically of the times when it was a superpower and contributes to the “great power syndrome”.

Russia is planning to gradually establish its national security from the Mediterranean within its own threat assessment. ⁽¹⁴⁾ For this, it considers that it must have a presence in the Mediterranean. The former Commander of the Russian Naval Forces, Full Admiral Vladimir Masorin, stated in August 2007 that Russia should have a permanent presence in the Mediterranean. During his visit to the Russian fleet in Sevastopol, Masorin made a statement to Russia's Interfax agency, “The Mediterranean is of great strategic importance for the Black Sea Fleet.” ⁽¹⁵⁾  During his first presidency, Putin closed bases in Vietnam and Cuba for strategic reasons. From the second presidential term, Putin began to focus on the Russian navy. During Putin's third presidency, Russia is now holding base talks with Cuba, Vietnam and the Seychelles. The Commander of the Russian Naval Forces, Vice Admiral Viktor Chirkov, made a first-hand statement on this matter recently. Chirkov openly said that they would not leave Tartus and that they would continue their presence in this port. According to Chirkov, the Tartus port is important for the activities of Russian warships in the Mediterranean, Gulf of Aden and Indian Ocean. ⁽¹⁶⁾

g. Security Concern 

One of the reasons behind Russia's indifference to the events in Syria is the concern that the effects of the “Arab Spring” might spread to Russia as well. That's why Russia carefully follows the events in the Middle East. Protest demonstrations and rallies of opposition groups in important cities before and after the elections that brought Putin to power for the third time increased Russia's concerns on this issue. From the point of view of Russia, it would be an undesirable development for the spirit of the Arab Spring to spread towards the center through the North Caucasus, Volga and Siberia.

For Russia, there is no problem with the regime in Syria. Considering a country like Syria, the current situation is the most suitable option for Moscow. Moscow does not even want to think about the possibility that the power will come under the control of groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood after the current regime is overthrown. It is worried that if such a possibility becomes a reality, it will have a negative impact on its Muslim population. According to Leonid Reshetnikov, Head of the Russian Strategic Research Institute, the danger is quite serious.⁽¹⁷⁾  So much so, that because of this concern, Moscow ignores the wishes of thousands of Caucasian Muslim Syrian citizens, mostly Circassians, who want to escape from the events in Syria and go to the North Caucasus republics, which are their original homeland, and tell their wishes to the Russian authorities.⁽¹⁸⁾  Considering that even Armenia is taking the Armenians from Syria to Armenia by aircrafts, the silence of Russia on this issue is quite remarkable.⁽¹⁹⁾

h. Socio-Cultural 

There is a population of tens of thousands in Syria who speaks Russian and knows Russia very well. The majority of them are people who have studied in the Soviet Union or the Russian Federation. About 8,000 of them married Russian citizens. On the other hand, due to the close relations established with Syria during the Soviet period, there is sympathy for Syria in the Russian public opinion. On the other hand, there are those who sympathize with Syria only because of the problems it has with the West and the United States, with the view that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”. In addition, the Russian press does not provide enough unbiased and satisfactory information about the events in Syria. Therefore, the Russian public does not have enough information about what is going on in Syria. The Russian public view the crisis as a struggle between radical rebels and terrorists supported by the West and the central government trying to protect the integrity of the country, and therefore sometimes draws similarities with the Chechnya problem.

The Russian public approaches the Syrian issue as emotionally as the government and the press reported. Examples of this are quite much. On March 23, 2011, the “Russia-Syria Friendship Association” was established in Moscow, right after the events started. In the spring of 2011, Russian Culture Days were held in Syria, and in the fall, Syrian Culture Days were held in Russia. ⁽²⁰⁾ In March, Russian Orthodox Church Patriarch Kril paid a four-day visit to Damascus. ⁽²¹⁾ On October 19, 2012, the "International Day of Solidarity with the Syrian People" rally organized by some organizations was held directly opposite the US Embassy in Moscow. ⁽²²⁾ Such rallies continued on 20 October in cities such as Saransk and Rostov. Pages supporting the Syrian government are opened on social networking websites. ⁽²³⁾ There were also reports in the media that the Syrian leader would leave his country and flee to Moscow and that Russia would grant him asylum. ⁽²⁴⁾  The "Russia-Syria Friendship Road" was opened on April 28, 2012 in Sokolniki Park, Moscow. The coordinator of the “For Gaddafi and His People” ⁽²⁵⁾ movement, who attended the opening ceremony, made a speech stating that those who destroyed Libya are now heading towards Syria, that Syria will emerge victorious from this, that the Russian people are on their side and that they want to open a marching path in Damascus soon. ⁽²⁶⁾ It can be stated that this kind of approach is motivated by the anti-West and anti-USA rather than sensitivity regarding Libya or Syria.

6-Evaluation 

Based on the reasons mentioned above, Russia continues to support the Assad regime. However, this policy is also a policy that has some handicaps in terms of itself. No power in the world struggling with its own people has been successful so far. Repressive regimes that try to bring their people back on track through violence have all gone down in history. The same fate awaits the Assad regime in Syria. However, since Russia cannot get rid of its old habits, it is going towards failure step by step in Syria. Any situation can now be counted as a loss for Russia. With the increasing dose of violence, the Assad regime is becoming more marginalized and excluded by the world. Even when the time cannot be predicted, it is now seen as a matter of time before Assad leaves power. According to optimistic scenarios, maybe the regime will disappear with Assad and a new Syria can be established. If the Assad regime is destroyed and the new regime established instead of the old regime, it will definitely review its relations with Russia, which supports the old regime at all costs. If the Assad regime is not destroyed, Russia will have a negative image as it will be seen as the only supporter of such a bloody regime. Therefore, when rumors spread that Assad would seek refuge in Russia, expert Aleksey Malashenko from the Moscow Carnegie Institute stated that this would be appropriate for both Assad and Russia. According to Malashenko, this way, Assad would not fall into Gaddafi's situation, and Russia would have one last chance to maintain its political direction. ⁽²⁷⁾

Pessimistic scenarios about the future of Syria point to fragmentation, a violent civil war and sectarian strife. Both results will mean “a loss for Russia”. Moscow, which supports the regime at all costs, is already receiving criticism from the Sunni majority states, which make up the majority of the Islamic world. Lebanon and majority of Arab countries are against Assad regime. However, in the 2000s, Russia was making efforts to improve its relations with the Islamic world in general and the Middle East Arab countries in particular, and it was getting good results in this policy. The Syrian crisis has the potential to reverse these rationales.

On the other hand, the emergence of bad scenarios may lead to international intervention, which brings Russia face to face with the reality of foreign intervention, which it has been against from the very beginning. Because Russia, which has locked the UN, which is trying to solve the problem by playing the veto trump card, may fall into the trap of strengthening the hand of those who support the option of military intervention outside the UN. In such a case, it will lose its chance to influence the developments. However, if he had chosen the path of putting pressure on the Assad regime and going for reforms at the very beginning of the crisis, instead of going this way, he could have provided more assistance to the Assad administration than he did by vetoing. But Russia still likes to solve problems with "hard power" and prefers competition. ⁽²⁸⁾ Had he done the opposite, the influence of Russian diplomacy would have been felt in the international arena, it would have increased its prestige in the eyes of the world public and consolidated its power in the Middle East. In a sense, Russia chose the most difficult and risky way. Until the end, he will show his support with the method he knows best, but if he realizes that he is not getting what he hopes for, he will soften his policy if acceptable assurances are given and a bigger profit is offered.

WHAT SHOULD TURKEY DO?

1. Scholars of Turkey and Islamic Countries should come together before it is too late and fail the possible plans of the new evil order. If Iran cannot be persuaded, it must ally with Sunni Islamic Countries: It should get rid of loneliness with mutual benefit solidarity with countries such as China and Japan.
2. While Turkey implements policies that will neutralize internal polarizations, it must also show its determination to protect internal threats and borders in the eastern and southeastern regions by using force, unconditionally.
3. Undoubtedly, Allah (SWT) also has a Plan. If we are sincerely committed as Muslims, ALLAH will help us, inshaAllah..

Researched and Posted by:

Ali COŞAR – Vice President of Board of Directors of ASSAM and ASDER (October 17, 2015)

Reference:

[1] http://mehmetardicc.blogcu.com/hakimiyet-teorileri/13178512

[2] http://www.kitapstore.com/urun/150501/kitap/21-asir/prof-dr-ramazan-ozey/merkezi-turk-hakimiyeti-teorisi/

[3] http://proje.akdeniz.edu.tr/mcri/cedrus/3-2015/CDR_Jun2015_351to367.pdf

[4] http://www.nedirvikipedi.com/rusya-federasyonu/

[5] http://www.bilgiduragi.com/konu/rusyanin-sicak-denizlere-inme-politikasinin-osmanli-devletine-etkileri-kisaca.2520/

[6] http://proje.akdeniz.edu.tr/mcri/cedrus/3-2015/CDR_Jun2015_351to367.pdf   

[7] http://politikaakademisi.org/sscb-sonrasi-rusyanin-gucu/ Murat ÇİÇEK/UPA Eskişehir Anadolu Üniversitesi Temsilcisi

[8] http://www.turktime.com/haber/Rus-Donanmasi-Yeniden-Akdeniz-e-Iniyor-/32173

[9] http://www.uiportal.net/rusyanin-suriye-politikasi-ve-turkiye-rusya-iliskileri.html Writer: Fatih ÖZBAY December 03, 2012

[10] http://www.uiportal.net/rusyanin-suriye-politikasi-ve-turkiye-rusya-iliskileri.html