The Assad regime's collapse signifies more than the fall of another Middle Eastern dictator – it reveals the limits of Russian military capability in the wake of the Ukraine invasion. Assad's devastating failure stems from his greatest former asset: Russian support. During the civil war, Assad grew entirely dependent on Russian military backing. While Russia's 2015 intervention saved his regime, it also created an unsustainable reliance. When Russia began withdrawing forces from Syria in 2022 to support its Ukraine campaign, Assad's vulnerability became apparent.
Aleppo's fall perfectly demonstrates this shift. Once a symbol of Assad's triumph after its 2016 recapture with Russian air support, the city fell to rebels in mere days. With Russian forces largely redeployed to Ukraine, the crucial air and intelligence support that once protected the city vanished. Furthermore, Syria's military, despite Russian-led modernization efforts, proved unable to operate effectively without Russian backing.
For Moscow, the Syrian intervention represented more than supporting an ally – it demonstrated Russia's return to great power status. The ability to intervene successfully far beyond its borders and maintain an ally's regime exemplified this power. Russian bases in Syria provided strategic Mediterranean assets, enabling regional influence and crisis intervention. The campaign also showcased Russian military technology, boosting arms exports.
The Ukraine conflict, however, revealed Russian military limitations. Maintaining simultaneous operations in Syria and Ukraine – first in eastern Ukraine in 2015, then in the full-scale invasion of 2022 – proved beyond Moscow's capabilities. Transferring air assets, defense systems, and special forces to Ukraine significantly reduced Russia's presence in Syria. Moscow's strategists apparently miscalculated, expecting Syria to remain a low-intensity conflict requiring minimal forces.
This new reality forces Russia to reassess its strategy. The priority now is negotiating with rebels to maintain strategic assets, particularly the Khmeimim Air Base and Tartus Naval Base. This necessitates establishing diplomatic channels with Syria's new power brokers.
A new chapter?
Could Assad's fall mark the end of Russian influence in Syria? Not necessarily. Despite bombing rebels for nine years, Russia might adapt to new realities. With Hayat Tahrir al-Sham controlling Damascus and seeking governmental legitimacy, Russia could offer three key benefits: international recognition, counterbalance to Turkish influence, and military support – using the same assets previously deployed against them.
While Russia's global influence has diminished, its permanent Security Council seat and diplomatic leverage across Central Asia, the Middle East, and Africa remain valuable. For Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, seeking international legitimacy and facing potential challenges from rival groups, Russian recognition could prove crucial.
A Russian partnership could also help balance Hayat Tahrir al-Sham's relationship with Turkey. Rather than depending on a single foreign supporter, they could leverage both powers' interests. Russia's demands might prove lighter than Turkey's, focusing primarily on maintaining influence rather than broader regional objectives.
Moreover, Russia retains significant military assets in Syria. It can provide air support, special forces expertise, military training, and intelligence capabilities. For Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, rebuilding military forces to counter other rebel groups, Russian support could prove invaluable – with Moscow asking only to maintain its Syrian bases in return. Thus, despite visible evacuations from Russian facilities in Latakia, Moscow's role in Syria may be evolving rather than ending.
