Russia has started air strikes in Syria claiming to fight against ISIS. The military intervention brings a new dimension to Syrian crisis. In order to understand the Russian perspective Feyza Gumusluoglu spoke to a prominent Russian academic and analyst Yan Vaslavsky who is the director of the School of Government and International Affairs at MGIMO University as well as Rethinking think-tank in Moscow.

Russia has started bombing ISIS targets in Syria. Had the military operation long been on the table in Moscow or it was an unexpected move?

There have been some signals of the Russian action but still it was surprise for many of us. Of course such operations cannot be planned in few days for sure there has been some kind of preparation but it was not announced. In order to carry such operation Russia did not only need to prepare its air forces but also needed to settle it with its allies countries which welcomed the operation and provided assistance such as Iran and Iraq.

Obama said “Russian air strikes strengthen ISIS.” Does this action can create a tension between the USA and Russia?

I hope it will create not tension but practical cooperation. The Pentagon recently requested cooperation and exchange of information about the operation and it was welcomed by the Russian Defece Ministry. From Russia’s perspective we have been seeing the USA bombing targets in Syria for more than a year without any viable result. ISIS is only strengthening. Also the Assad opposition remains very active. On the other hand Bashar Al Assad’s army cannot resist ISIS for too long because they have been weakening. We have to understand that ISIS is not only a threat for Syria it is a regional and international threat.

What is Russia hoping to gain from this operation?

For Russia it is not only a fight against terrorism. It has become an opportunity for our foreign policy since the collapse of the Soviet Union to act decisively and comprehensively. If you look at the operations of the USA in Syria the efficiency is really doubted maybe only their PR is good. But if you look at the Russian operations there is a big difference in terms of sharing information by the Ministry of Defence. It gives lots of information about what is going on in Syria; images videos everything is clear and transparent. This is one of the things that allows to say that the efficiency of this operation is much higher.

For how long do you expect this operation to continue?

Russia is not planning to conduct this operation for years. And we are not talking about ground operation it is limited to air force and missiles only. There is only one task which is to fight ISIS and help Assad to restore his power on his request by the way. Russia is now the only country in Syria which acts fully in coherence with international law. There are two things that can legalise foreign presence in a country. The first one is a UN Security Council decision. There is no such decision. But the other one is an official request from a government of a certain country to help. Russia received such a request from the Syrian leader.

This is the first time Russia has gone this far since the collapse of the Soviet Union? What does that really mean?

If you go deep into the history you can better understand the logic of Russian action in Syria. We must remember the case of Afghanistan. Russia conducted an inefficient and costly operation in Afghanistan. For the Soviet society it became a deep wound. Many men were sent to fight many died some came injured. It became a social problem kind of an ‘Afghan syndrome’. We were unsuccessful in certain foreign operations in the past. Then for years after the collapse of the Soviet Union Russia has never had the ambition to go outside of post-Soviet space until now. Syria has provided an opportunity for Russia to do something useful outside the region.

Why now?

I would say time has come for Russia to come back to the global issues. What the majority of Russian foreign policy analysts agree on today is that the unipolar model has failed because wherever the USA has engaged in the recent years they only left behind civil war and devastation. We don’t do such harm. We criticised them and said “you should not have intervened in Iraq and Libya. Maybe you ousted the previous leaders but what for? The only result you caused are civil wars and disintegration.” For us it is the moment to engage again. In regard to ISIS the USA did not bomb some of the ISIS targets despite they knew the location. Why? If you know the coordinates why don’t you bomb? I believe there is a double game here. Russia clearly made everyone understand that we do not have a double game in Syria. Our aim is simple we are helping the government of Assad on his request. That is it.

Is the real target ISIS?

First and primary target is ISIS. It is a common threat to international security including Russia. It is better to start fighting terrorism when it is still far from your borders before it reaches your country. We very well know what international terrorism is. In 1990s we had a huge problem in northern Caucasus with our Chechen republic very dangerous regime which was illegally created there by local separatists and brought a lot of problems to regional stability. Then Russia saw terrorist attacks in late 1990s. Those people extremists came from Chechnya and it was all supported by outside forces like Al Qaeda. We know what terrorism can lead to. Russia decided to combat ISIS when it is still far from its borders especially when one considers that ISIS has already sent threats to Russia.

The opposition forces are being targeted as well according to some reports…

I personally do not have enough information to judge. But if you put yourself in the shoes of Assad who is now combating in two fronts one against ISIS and the other one is the opposition which gets outside support. It might be true that these groups were targeted too. But isn’t Jabhat Al Nusra a terrorist organisation as well? There is a fundamental difference in approach to Russian action. In the West everyone says that if Russia attacks the opposition it is not right because Assad is no longer legitimate in their eyes. But in the eyes of Russian government and people Assad is the only legitimate leader of Syria. So in our logic we do not do anything wrong or unlawful. We have the official request from the Syrian government. The whole idea is not to only eliminate ISIS and other terrorists but at the same time to ensure the Syrian government who is officially elected. Russia is just doing what it should do helping the legitimate government.

According to Moscow the whole Syrian opposition is terrorist there is no modest opposition. Do not you think it is a problematic approach?

OK how can terrorists be distinguished as moderate or radical? Terrorists are just terrorists. Western governments call certain extremists who organise terrorist attacks and fight against national army ‘moderate opposition’ but we do not understand how such an opposition can be moderate how is it distinguished at all? Those are forces who try to destabilise the constitutional framework. For us those who go beyond constitutional framework are extremists by definition some of them become terrorists. It is not only taking weapons and going to fight. The mere idea of leaving the negotiation table is unacceptable.

Why is Assad so important to Moscow?

Russia saw the Arab Spring. The main results of the Arab Spring are not positive. It has led to disorder social and economic problems in many countries. What happened in Syria was another illegal attempt to overthrow a legitimate leader. For us the priority is territorial integrity sovereignty and power of the local government. Supporting Bashar Al Assad is not like supporting one of the gangs in Syria as the West tries to portray. It is supporting the legitimate government. That is the difference. Besides Syria is really important to us. The Soviet Union had strong ties with Syrian government. It is a historical ally for us.

How is the public opinion in Russia regarding the operations?

There is an overwhelming support for the operations thanks to the Russian government which shares lots of information with the public. Russians are not afraid only of ISIS but also the whole opposition in Syria because of the Arab Spring experience. By the way Russian Muslim community supports the operation as well. Most Russians perceive this operation as a very successful move by Putin because for the first time in many years Russia is not a dependent force. It is not us who react to something this time it is us who have the initiative and the USA and European leaders have to cooperate. So for us it demonstrates Russia’s growing military and political force it is an opportunity. I am not saying the Russian intervention does not hold any risk. There are lots of risks.

What are the risks for Russia?

Russia has gone into war in Syria on the side of one particular group or party which is the Assad government. Second Russia is coordinating with the Shias. Moscow has to be very careful when it cooperates with the Shias against the Sunnis in certain countries. Russian Muslims are on Putin’s side. Ramzan Kadyrov leader of the Russian Chechen Republic even proposed to send his ground forces to Syria to help Putin. But it does not make the whole operation less sensitive or dangerous because the Muslim world is very diverse. We understand that our involvement in the support of only one side can lead to some unexpected or unwanted outcomes. Plus the Syrian operation will add another dimension to our relations with Western countries.

Are we on the brink of a new Cold War?

If you look at the recent speeches of Putin he noted several times that it is not Russia who started talking of civil war again. It is the USA and some of their allies in Europe which have never stopped thinking in the logic of civil war even when Russia was very weakened in 1990s. We have our own national interests and in certain cases need to defend ourselves. If we talk about the Cold War then the Russian public would say it is not Russia who has this discourse. It is not Cold War it is a new reality which is called multi-polar world. Russia is just trying to live in a new reality while the West is pretending as if they are still 30 or 40 years ago when there were no China India or Brazil as forces like they are nowadays. It is a multi-polar world today where there are at least several strong powers.

The Peninsula