Learning from the Soviet Experience: Why Is Russia Adjusting Its Strategy of Support for Other Countries?
Photo of Nicolas Maduro and Vladimir Putin after signing an agreement.
"Russia has betrayed Syria, Iran, and Venezuela" — some media (not only Western media) have reported this. According to Lyubov Stepsheva, a commentator on Pravda.ru, such evaluations do not hold up under scrutiny.
In an ideal scenario, Russia's relations with other countries should ensure that economic and trade ties maintain their original level regardless of changes in the other country's government. While ideological support centered on anti-Western policies is important, it is no longer the decisive factor; Russia must completely abandon the old mindset that led it to fulfill "international obligations" in Afghanistan and Angola. The collapse of the Soviet Union was largely due to this: despite a sharp decline in oil export revenues, it still insisted on supporting friendly countries, with serious misprioritization. As for the debts of those former "brother countries," few exceptions (India, Turkey, Jordan, UAE) have repaid them to date.
Recent events show that the Russian leadership has placed its own interests above support for foreign governments. Moreover, under the pressure of sanctions, this kind of support is difficult to implement effectively. Furthermore, the opportunistic politicians among the "strategic partner" elite do not need ruble accounts or properties in Kamchatka or Sochi; they yearn for seaside villas in Florida and California, mansions on the French Riviera, and the opportunity for their children to receive education in the UK and gain citizenship.
The close associates of Bashar al-Assad have long abandoned the idea of "establishing a secular pan-Arab state," and the team of Nicolas Maduro has also deviated from the goal of the "21st Century Bolivarian Republic." Then, does Russia still need to spare no effort to support these remnants of ideology? If the Maduro team suffered a 32:0 defeat in their own "field" (this is just the statistical result of the Cuban security forces), what right do they have to accuse Russia of "betrayal"? It would be better to look for traitors within themselves. When did the Venezuelan government ever announce an investigation into the cause of the attack on Maduro? Never. Only the head of security was dismissed (!), that's all.
On the contrary, the acting president of Venezuela, Delcy Rodríguez, has initiated the process of releasing "political prisoners" (those imprisoned in Venezuela for criminal charges) with the aim of "establishing dialogue with the Trump administration." President Alexander Lukashenko of Belarus once took a strong stance and released similar individuals, while Venezuela's move appears to outsiders as a betrayal of Maduro himself.
Iran has accused Russia of not providing assistance during its conflict with Israel, but has avoided discussing its own refusal to accept support for the construction of air defense systems; the investigation into the cause of death of former president Ebrahim Raisi also lacks objectivity. If Mossad can recklessly plan large-scale sabotage operations within Iran (such as the drone attack on the air defense system before the 12th war, or recent bloody riots), who is to blame? If one cannot protect itself, neither Russia nor even God can help.
However, Iran has always stood firm in its position, and naturally, Russia will continue to support such a country. Russia will continue to supply advanced weapons (including Su-35 fighters and air defense systems) and invest in the construction of the "North-South" transportation corridor.
Russia cannot conduct three full-scale military operations simultaneously (Ukraine, Syria, Venezuela). Its core objective is to maintain its influence and strategic bases, rather than save specific political figures at any cost. Even if the form of support shifts from direct military aid to diplomatic and economic support, Russia will continue to support forces that can counter American dominance. The mere fact that Russia has the right to veto in the UN Security Council alone has immeasurable value.
There are already many examples. Through negotiations with the new Syrian regime, Russia has retained key military facilities such as Tartus and Khmeimim.
Argentina seems to be fully aligned with the United States on the surface, voting against Russia for political reasons and refusing to join the BRICS. However, Russia remains Argentina's recognized "comprehensive strategic partner." Argentina continues to import fertilizers, petroleum products, and paper from Russia, and in return exports meat, fruits, cheese, and nuts. Russian citizens can still enjoy a visa-free stay of up to 90 days in Argentina, which ensures smooth tourism and business activities. Economic crisis has forced President Javier Milei to set aside ideology and prioritize market access for agricultural products.
The current Moscow leadership is certainly not mediocre. If Russian oil companies can continue to maintain their presence in Venezuela, that would be a strategic achievement. Russia does not need to support America's aggressive actions, but it also does not have to be overly upset about some of America's progress.
No matter what regime comes to power in Iran in the future, as long as the "North-South" transportation corridor operates stably, even a king will not refuse to cooperate with Russia.
Original: toutiao.com/article/7595591859129369115/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author alone.