Does Putin's muscle have a warranty?

As expected, the meeting between U.S. President Barack Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin did not provide any results. From Putin's perspective, however, the meeting's very existence was an achievement. It provided further proof, for those who still need it, as to who is setting the tone on the international stage these days.

The immediate impetus for holding the meeting was Russia's involvement in Syria. We should however, call the child by name -- which is blunt in intervention in Syria's civil war, reminiscent of the bygone Soviet era, with Russian troops essentially occupying the Syrian coast as part of a Russian-Iranian campaign to save the regime of Bashar Assad, the dictator from Damascus.

Putin has sought to mark his territory while exploiting the weakness of an adversary who is trying his hardest to avoid any type of conflict. By doing so, the Russian president has delivered a few important messages.

Firstly, Russia and Putin, in contrast to Obama, stand alongside their allies and do not abandon them. Indeed, battered and bruised as he may be, Assad is still an ally and a Russian patron; therefore, and as opposed to the Americans, the Russians have no intention of casting him into the dustbin the moment he ceases to be of use or becomes a burden. If we recall, when the Arab Spring erupted in January 2011, the Americans discarded former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in precisely such a manner. Every dictator across the globe is undoubtedly reassessing whether to place faith in Putin's commitment to his allies, or an American system of interests predicated on cutting losses by dropping bad investments before it is too late.

Secondly, Russia is not bothered by the types of moral or ethical concerns that guide public opinion in the West. Assad can use chemical weapons as he sees fit while leading his country to ruin, but Russia will continue to support him, because he is an ally who serves Russian interests.

Thirdly, similar to the Soviet-era intervention in Cuba or Afghanistan, and even in Egypt, Putin's Russia is willing to throw down the gauntlet and send military forces to promote its interests. It doesn't matter whether this pertains to Ukraine or Syria, or its conflicts with Japan in the Far East.

Obama has no interest in a conflict, not with Putin and not anywhere else, and under his stewardship the U.S. has withdrawn from playing an active role in a significant portion of crises around the globe. The vacuum left behind is being exploited by Putin, first in Europe and now in the Middle Ease as well.

Still, Russian intervention in Syria could prove to be a mistake for Putin. Nothing positive can come from an evil alliance with Iran's Revolutionary Guard, Hezbollah and Assad. This is an alliance of obstruction, focused on the threat posed by the Islamic State group and ensuring the survival of the Assad regime, and basically blocking any Western solution to the crisis. Putin should know that he who goes to bed with dogs wakes up to discover the Iranians and Hezbollah, with Russian aid and weapons, pushing ahead with their own agenda in Syria and across the Middle East.

A few planes and even hundreds or thousands of Russian troops cannot truly and fundamentally alter the situation on the ground in Syria, just as hundreds of thousands of Russian soldiers could not do in Afghanistan three decades ago. The Russians have apparently forgotten what it means to go to war against Islamic gangs, and didn't learn anything from America's lessons in Iraq and Afghanistan. While Assad is implementing the Russian doctrine from the war in Chechnya, it does not appear that the hundreds of thousands killed and millions of refugees are providing any results.

Beyond all this, it is important to keep in mind that Putin is essentially a strong leader heading a mediocre country propped by a weak economy and fragile foundation. Obama, meanwhile, despite appearing unimpressive and hesitant, heads a global power with a fundamentally strong society and economy. From an historical perspective, the U.S. has always been able to come out on top when it has shown the desire and determination to do so.

טעינו? נתקן! אם מצאתם טעות בכתבה, נשמח שתשתפו אותנו