All eyes on Russian minister's Syria trip

 
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on 6 February 2012 Sergei Lavrov's visit is a chance for Russia to show it has an alternative to end Syria's spiralling violence

As Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov heads to Syria for talks with President Bashar al-Assad, BBC Moscow correspondent Daniel Sandford assesses what he might hope to achieve from his visit.

Tuesday's visit by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and the director of Russia's Foreign Intelligence Service, Mikhail Fradkov, comes three days after the UN Security Council meeting in which Russia and China vetoed a resolution condemning the Syrian government's violence against its citizens.

Sergei Lavrov has not revealed the details of the message he says he is taking to Damascus from his own head of state, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.

Mr Lavrov said that those who "hastily" brought the resolution to a vote in the Security Council had ignored Russia's request to wait until he had been to see President Assad.

He described comments by American and European leaders after the vote as "indecent and hysterical."

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said: "What happened (on Saturday) at the United Nations was a travesty... Faced with a neutered Security Council, we have to redouble our efforts outside of the United Nations with those allies and partners who support the Syrian people's right to have a better future."

Russia has caused outrage in many Western and Arab countries by blocking attempts to use the United Nations to pressure President Assad to step aside.

Start Quote

Russia derives a significant amount of its influence and image in the world from maintaining a very traditional strict dividing line between internal and international affairs”

End Quote James Sherr Royal Institute of International Affairs

If Assad's government does eventually fall, Russia will lose its last remaining ally in the region, which makes its position look rather short-term.

But James Sherr, Senior Fellow of the Russia Eurasia programme at the Royal Institute of International Affairs, explained that while the Russian position may seem strange to some, it is actually based on a quite simple logic.

"Russia is a country which derives a significant amount of its influence and image in the world from maintaining a very traditional strict dividing line between internal and international affairs," he said.

"This is a selling point, because Russia is able to say: "Look we are not the United States, we are not the EU. We are a reliable consistent partner". And in a world consisting still, overwhelmingly, of not terribly democratic states this is very important. And Russia can't just walk away from it."

Russia has its last remaining naval base in the Mediterranean at the Syrian port of Tartus. Russia is also Syria's main supplier of weapons.

"The base at Tartus is becoming a significant military base again," James Sherr said. "And Syria is one of the few countries in the world to have had a consistent military relationship with both the Soviet Union and Russia."

Contradictory position

Nonetheless there are signs that Sergei Lavrov and Mikhail Fradkov may use the meeting to encourage some sort of change in Syria.

As Sergei Lavrov explained to ABC Australia last week: "We're not a friend, we're not an ally of President Assad. We never said that President Assad remaining in power is the solution to the crisis."

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in Damascus on 5 February 2012 Sergei Lavrov has made it clear Russia is "no ally" of President Assad

But he also said: "I don't think Russian policy is about asking people to step down. Regime change is not our profession. It is up to the Syrians themselves to decide how to run the country, how to introduce the reforms, what kind of reforms, without any outside interference."

That is where Western diplomats say a contradiction emerges in the Russian position. While it says that the people have a right to choose their leader, it does not allow for the international community to support a population trying to overthrow an unpopular government.

This means that, while Russia says it is trying to prevent an escalation of the conflict, some in the Syrian opposition claim that the Russian/Chinese veto is in fact driving them closer to all-out conflict.

But Sergei Lavrov said that the vetoed UN Security Council resolution had not put enough pressure on opposition groups and "armed extremists" to also withdraw their forces from areas of conflict.

"Such a resolution would have meant the Security Council was taking the side of one participant in a civil war," he said.

His meeting in Damascus is Russia's chance to show that it has an alternative to end the spiralling violence in Syria.

 

More on This Story

Syria conflict

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external Internet sites

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
 
  • rate this
    +2

    Comment number 158.

    Re 149: I think we know the answer don't we? It's funny how the BBC have ignored the events at Liverpool Crown Court this week as well. Still, we must be 'sensitive' mustn't we?

    Re 151: A pound to a penny, the BBC will hail them as 'freedom fighters' and invite them on to chat with a deeply concerned Sian Lloyd in the morning.

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 157.

    So judging from Sergei's comments, several of Hilary Clinton's comments really hit their mark, but they are hiding behind semantics rather than admit they made a mistake.

    At least if the Russians are now publicly distancing themselves from Assad & his regime, its a start. I just hope that they make their next diplomatic move fairly quickly, since further delays just mean more civilian casualties.

  • rate this
    +2

    Comment number 156.

    The BBC?! Starves us of honest debate yet champions free speech?

  • rate this
    +2

    Comment number 155.

    //theilliberal
    8 Minutes ago
    What happens in the UK when minorities start rising up violently?//

    Same as happens now. The so-called liberals, Archbishops, BBC etc justify their actions, by regarding their actions as 'understandable' and somehow our, the victims', fault. Bombs, riots and murders are, in the UK, largely done by the left or those they sympathise with.

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 154.

    149.Braumeister1
    Agreed
    Shame on the BBC, now they are scared to offend seriously dangerous malcontents who seek the destruction of our way of life and our freedoms.
    Give your paymasters a voice its what you are paid to do and your reputation hangs in the balance regarding your stance on free speech.
    Do we go elsewhere for a means of debate on matters of importance?

 

Comments 5 of 158

 

More Middle East stories

RSS

Features

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.