Why Russia is reasserting itself in Syria

Russia likely assumed that increased US military support for Israel would shift American focus to the Middle East, thereby diverting attention and resources away from Ukraine. The Israel-Hamas conflict also provided a convenient distraction from Russia's own war in Ukraine.

Additionally, rising anti-American sentiment across the Middle East and the Global South—fuelled by President Biden's unequivocal support for Israel—also worked in Moscow's favour. But as events in Syria began to directly threaten Russian interests, Moscow shifted from passive observer to active player.

Tactical shift

When Israeli operations in Syria intensified, and the prospect of a wider regional conflict loomed, Russia could no longer afford to remain passive. Escalating regional tensions raised the risk of Syria being drawn into a larger armed confrontation, potentially undermining Moscow's foothold in the region.

In response, Russia began playing a more active role in southern Syria. On 21 October, Russian forces conducted joint military exercises with the Syrian regime near the occupied Golan Heights. This show of force came on the heels of Israeli military reinforcements and the construction of trenches along the Demilitarised Military Zone with Syria. These developments appear to have alarmed Moscow, as they suggested a possible shift in control dynamics, particularly in the strategic region of Quneitra.

The urgency of Russia's concerns became evident in remarks by Alexander Lavrentiev, Moscow's special envoy to Syria. In a recent interview with Russia Today, Lavrentiev warned of the possibility of an Israeli invasion of southern Syria, cautioning that such a move would elicit a "negative" response from Moscow.

In addition to verbal warnings, Russia has reinforced its military footprint on the ground. Earlier this month, Moscow established a new military observation post in southern Syria, bringing the total number of monitoring points in the region to eight. This expanded presence is a clear attempt to dissuade Israel from escalating its operations and to assert Russia's role as a key player in the unfolding dynamics.

Covert trip

In light of Russia's increased military presence, Israel has reportedly explored the possibility of leveraging Moscow's influence to achieve its strategic objectives. Israeli media outlets report that Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer, a close advisor to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, recently made a covert trip to Russia to solicit Kremlin support in securing a ceasefire in Lebanon. Israel hopes for Moscow's backing in a diplomatic arrangement that would involve Russia's assistance in halting Hezbollah's supply routes from Syria.

However, Russia's limited capacity and increasingly close ties with Iran have decreased its appetite for cooperation. Alexander Lavrentiev, Russia's presidential envoy to Syria, told Russian media on 13 November that Israel's request would necessitate setting up physical barriers and checkpoints along the border to effectively block Hezbollah's supply routes.

He  described such an operation as "extremely challenging" for Russian forces and noted that it falls outside Russia's mandate in Syria, which he emphasised is limited to "counter-terrorism operations." He argued that "these responsibilities should fall directly on the Lebanese authorities and the Syrian government" and clarified that Russia does not have the capacity to "influence this matter."

US-Russian deal?

Moscow's reluctance to implement Israel's envisioned arrangements does not imply a complete unwillingness to de-escalate the situation. Rather, Russia is looking for a deal that serves its own strategic interests. Israel's proposal—apart from requiring significant financial and human resources—would likely put Moscow at odds with Hezbollah and Iran, both of whom would strongly oppose Israeli terms. Such a commitment could also jeopardise Russia's influence in Syria and even strain its critical alliance with Iran, especially in light of Iranian supplies aiding Russian forces in Ukraine.

Recognising that pressuring Israel to compromise is improbable, Moscow seems to be shifting its focus toward potential negotiations with the incoming US administration under President-elect Donald Trump. In a 13 November interview with TASS, Lavrentiev discussed the possibility of dialogue with Trump's team, signalling Moscow's openness: "If our American partners wish to explore such contacts, then Russia is ready for this." Lavrentiev hinted that Trump, known for his transactional style, might bring new opportunities for cooperation: "Let's see what he can offer in this direction."

Lavrentiev also acknowledged that achieving lasting peace in Syria requires addressing broader regional dynamics, including those in Lebanon, Gaza, and the Israel-Iran relationship. "Everything must work together," he said, underscoring the need for all parties to show flexibility. He expressed cautious optimism, adding, "We expect that we will be able to reach some specific agreements, including on Syria."

While securing an agreement involving Iran and Hezbollah would theoretically simplify Russia's role as a guarantor, Moscow's capacity to enforce such a deal remains questionable. In 2018, Russia brokered an agreement aimed at keeping Iranian forces and affiliated militias away from Syria's southern border with Israel—primarily to alleviate Israeli security concerns. However, the agreement largely failed to prevent Iran and its proxies from re-establishing a presence in southern Syria.

Over time, Iranian forces and allied militias, including Hezbollah, have established a strong foothold in the border area, often under the guise of Syrian military units or local militias. Moscow, unable to enforce the terms, neither publicly criticized these violations nor acknowledged its failure to uphold the deal. This underscores Russia's limited leverage over Iranian activities in Syria, casting doubt on its ability to enforce any future agreement, even if Iran and Hezbollah initially agree to comply.

Russia's increased engagement in Syria reflects its ambition to reshape regional dynamics, yet its capacity to act as a dependable guarantor of stability remains highly questionable. Moscow's actions are guided by self-interest, aimed at solidifying its foothold in the Middle East while carefully preserving ties with key allies, such as Iran.

Until the deeper causes of insecurity in the region are meaningfully addressed, Russia's assertive manoeuvres will remain a short-term power play rather than a path to enduring stability. True progress demands confronting the entrenched rivalries and systemic issues that perpetuate instability—anything less will leave the region trapped in a cycle of tension and unrest with no sustainable resolution in sight.