The White House seems to think that Vladimir Putin鈥檚 Syria policy is a blunder of the first order. Recently, the Russians have deployed combat planes, , ships, engineers, technicians, as well as special forces units to help sustain Bashar al-Assad鈥檚 regime. But that鈥檚 a bad idea, President Obama said last week. The project, he averred, was 鈥渄oomed to fail.鈥� Moscow, he contended, was 鈥済oing to have to start getting a little smarter.鈥�
Presumably, White House officials are telling themselves that Syria will be Putin鈥檚 Vietnam, or his Afghanistan, or some manner of 鈥渜uagmire鈥� from which he will be unable to extricate himself. It鈥檚 useful to recall that the administration thought the same regarding Iran. Syria, in Obama鈥檚 , was 鈥渂leeding [the Iranians] because they're having to send in billions of dollars.鈥�
Indeed, Syria might well have become an Iranian sinkhole except for the fact that the White House continued to bail out the Islamic Republic鈥檚 , IRGC-Quds Force commander Qassem Suleimani, by providing him air cover in Iraq, coordinating with his allies in Lebanon, and in Syria leaving his friends alone and targeting some of his enemies. President Obama is a very smart man but it鈥檚 become increasingly clear that there are significant gaps in his knowledge. As the Cold War shows, it is very difficult to bleed an adversary unless you are willing to back its opponents. Obama, to the contrary, has endowed Iran with billions of dollars that will flow to it with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.
Russia鈥檚 hand is now similarly strengthened with its incursion into Syria. This is not a pile of rocks like Afghanistan that will serve as the tombstone of the Soviet empire, but rather a valuable piece of real estate on the Mediterranean through which Putin means to collect rent and project power. If Obama and John Kerry thought the Russians might be willing to abandon Bashar al-Assad, American gullibility has given the Russians a punchline. 鈥淩umors of Rus-US-Saudi 鈥榮ecret talks on ousting Assad鈥� groundless,鈥� the Russian ambassador to London Tuesday. 鈥淢oscow is not in the regime change business.鈥�
Certainly not. After all, it鈥檚 propping up Assad that has made Putin the main interlocutor on all things Syrian, so there鈥檚 no reason to forfeit that card. Whether the Saudis or Turks want to discuss terms for their Syrian proxies, the Europeans a ceasefire or the refugee crisis, or the Israelis Iranian arms shipments to Hezbollah, the world needs to come to Moscow or Sochi to get satisfaction.
Indeed, even Tehran is now indebted to Putin for helping rescue a vital Iranian interest. Without the Assad regime, Iran would have a much harder time resupplying Hezbollah, the clerical regime鈥檚 most useful deterrent force against Israel. Yes, Iranian and Russian interests in Syria are more or less aligned, but it鈥檚 no longer exactly an equal partnership鈥攊f you鈥檙e the one asking for help, you鈥檙e the junior partner, a reality that Suleimani鈥檚 to see Putin underscores. (A pro-Assad pro-Hezbollah newspaper in Beirut Tuesday that Suleimani made a to Russia.)
In short, Putin鈥檚 move was plenty smart. As a recent Wall Street Journal editorial 鈥淔or 70 years American Presidents from both parties have sought to thwart Russian influence in the Middle East.鈥� And now Putin is in. It鈥檚 true the Cold War ended more than two decades ago and the United States no longer depends as much on Persian Gulf oil as it did in the 1970s, but Putin鈥檚 military incursion into Syria still constitutes a strategic threat to American interests.
It puts an unfriendly Russia on the border of three key American allies in the Middle East鈥擨srael, Jordan, and Turkey. It gives Putin a forward operating base in the region鈥攁nd perhaps more importantly a permanent naval presence on the shores of the energy-rich eastern Mediterranean. The showing that Iran may become a major supplier of natural gas to Europe suggests that the Russian-Iranian relationship that has now been cemented in Syria will account for much of Europe鈥檚 energy needs, a fact that is likely to shape the policies of one of America鈥檚 key trading partners. And perhaps most importantly, the Russian-Iranian pact is likely to turn the Iranians into an even more aggressive and reckless regional actor.
The nuclear deal is predicated on the idea that the regime in Tehran will come to modify its behavior for the better in order to re-enter the community of nations. Obama says it doesn鈥檛 matter if the Iranians become more moderate since the JCPOA is better than no deal at all. But that can鈥檛 be true鈥攐r else the commander-in-chief is a sociopath who has put future generations of Americans in the crosshairs of an obscurantist, terror-supporting regime that will have an industrial-scale nuclear program within the next decade and a half.
No, in several interviews the president has expressed optimism that Iran would become a more rational actor in pursuing its interests. He and John Kerry have argued that the nuclear negotiations began a process in which 36 years of hostility between Iran and America were coming to a close, and now other avenues where Iran and the White House might cooperate were opening.
For the sake of argument, let鈥檚 stipulate that Obama and Kerry鈥檚 missionary zeal is grounded in fact鈥攖hat Iran really wants to come closer to the American orbit, if for no other reason than to make money. Putin鈥檚 move virtually ensures that鈥檚 not going to happen. Iran, beholden to a Russia that dispatched troops to defend a vital Iranian interest, is now firmly in Moscow鈥檚 orbit, and Putin sees himself in competition with the United States. He will be looking for ways to weaken America, and Iran will serve as a useful instrument.
For the last several years, the White House has given Iran plenty of room to maneuver around the region, lest it risk a nuclear deal with Iran. With his incursion into Syria, Putin has bought himself the same freedom, if not more, to operate in the Middle East. Now both Iran and Putin are holding the JCPOA hostage, and Obama will have no choice but to fall in line. Among other things, this means that Assad will stay in power, no matter how much traditional U.S. allies object, and the Israelis鈥� ability to move against Hezbollah will be sharply limited.
The point then isn鈥檛 just that Russia now has a foothold in the Middle East. Rather, through a combination of incompetence and hubris, Obama has tied American regional interests, as well as those of our allies, to the whims of a Russian dictator. Worse yet, it鈥檚 not clear how a future administration frees itself from this trap, partly set by the forty-fourth president of the United States.