Prime Minister Netanyahu's Visit to Russia
Magen, Zvi
INSS Insight No. 425. May 17, 2013
http://www.inss.org.il/publications.php?cat=21&incat=&read=11435

Shortly after his return from China, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu flew
to Russia for a hastily arranged visit with President Vladimir Putin. The
catalyst for the visit was the significant increase in activity around the
Syrian issue, including the attacks against Syrian targets attributed to
Israel, high level visits to Russia by leading international figures, and
Russia’s announcement of its intention to supply Syria with S-300 missiles.
Israel and Russia have held contacts prior to the visit, including a
conversation between Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Putin, and thus
the visit itself raised many questions, including: was it in fact about the
S-300 missiles? Indeed, Moscow has recently hosted high level visitors,
among them US Secretary of State John Kerry and British Prime Minister David
Cameron. The main topic in their talks with Putin and Foreign Minister
Sergei Lavrov was reportedly the Syrian issue. Thus it is evident that there
is vigorous activity by the Western powers and Israel on the Syrian issue
vis-à-vis Russia. What is this about?

Since the start of the civil war in Syria, Russia has gradually become the
leading player on the Syrian front. It has implemented a strategy of
preventing outside foreign intervention (using political and military
tools), which improves Bashar al-Assad’s ability to halt the rebel forces.
This strategy is actually used to pressure other global and regional players
(the United States and NATO on the one hand, and Turkey and elements in the
Sunni axis on the other). At the same time, Russia is working to promote
alternatives to a settlement on the Syrian issue that will ensure its future
standing in the Middle East, along with the survival of the radical axis of
Iran, Syria, and Hizbollah with Russian backing. Furthermore, Russia is
exploiting its Syrian leverage to promote solutions that are essential to it
in the global arena regarding its friction with the West (over a long list
of issues).

Yet while Russia’s achievements as to its Syrian policy are clear, it has
thus far not succeeded in extracting significant Western concessions
regarding the terms it has proposed for an agreement in Syria, at least
until recently. Now it appears that the latest developments are leading the
Western actor to reexamine its uncompromising position toward Russia’s
approach to a future settlement in Syria. Questions have arisen about the
ability of the rebels to overcome the regime without substantial outside
military aid, what now seems less and less feasible, and there is increasing
dissatisfaction with the growing Islamization among the Syrian opposition.
However, these developments are still not enough to meet Russia halfway on
its proposed position. The attacks attributed to Israel, which Moscow has
presented as preparation for the option of outside military intervention on
behalf of the rebels – which Russia is laboring hard to prevent – also
appear in this light.

The recent developments took place against this backdrop. During Secretary
Kerry’s May 7-8 visit to Moscow, the Syrian problem was discussed at length,
apparently in softer tones than in the past. Kerry’s visit was preceded by a
number of phone calls between President Obama and President Putin (three
since March), and a visit to Moscow by Tom Donilon, Obama’s national
security adviser, who presumably brought messages from Obama concerning
American willingness to cooperate on issues essential to Russia. Kerry’s
visit apparently ended with understandings reached on Syria, with the
parties officially announcing their agreement to convene an international
conference to discuss a settlement on the Syrian issue. The emerging model
is apparently the establishment of a transitional government with the
participation of the two camps in Syria. What comes out of this picture is
that the United States has conceded on Assad’s removal as a condition for
continuing the negotiations, while at the same time Russia has showed
willingness to concede on later support for Assad. It has also been reported
that Putin and Obama are expected to meet during the G8 summit in Northern
Ireland on June 17-18, and later, at the G20 meeting to be held in September
in Russia, which should lead to the resolution of all the unresolved issues
on their agenda.

Immediately after Kerry’s departure, Prime Minister Cameron arrived in
Moscow and discussed Syria with Putin. He too was favorably disposed toward
the idea of an international conference, including the idea of establishing
a transitional government in Syria. It has been reported that such a
conference will in fact take place in late May. However, the Russians
claimed that despite the good understandings reached in both visits, there
are still large gaps between the positions of the sides. Coincidentally, the
attack on the Syrian targets attributed to Israel occurred at the same time.

Immediately after that attack, the issue of the supply of S-300 missiles to
Syria rose to the headlines, followed by reports of the contacts between
Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Putin, as well as Netanyahu’s
intention to visit Russia. The contract to supply S-300 missiles is from
2010, but the missiles were not delivered to Syria or Iran because of
understandings reached with Russia. The subject reappeared in the summer of
2012, but again no missiles were delivered – some say because of an Israeli
request (Putin visited Israel in June 2012). The recycling of the issue,
along with a somewhat cynical announcement by Foreign Minister Lavrov that
new contracts had not been signed to supply the missiles and that “only”
existing ones were being fulfilled, requires an explanation. Russia’s
intention apparently is to use the missile issue as leverage to prevent
foreign military intervention in Syria, and also to obtain additional
concessions in negotiations with the West on formulating a settlement on
Syria in the framework of the international conference. The effectiveness of
this leverage is clear, evidenced by the visits to Putin, which enable him
to upgrade Russia’s positions on the subject of Syria.

During Netanyahu’s visit, Russia apparently took a sympathetic approach and
appeared willing to make various concessions. Although details of the
meeting were not publicized, it seems that all of the key questions on Syria
were debated. And while the Russians continue to claim that they will honor
the contract, it is still too early to determine definitively whether the
missiles will indeed be delivered. In any case, however, it is clear that
concessions are not made without receiving something in return.
==========
The Institute for National Security Studies • 40 Haim Levanon St. • Tel
Aviv 61398 • Israel • 03-640-0400 • e-mail: info@inss.org.il