How The West's Generational War With Russia Led To The Ascendancy of Islamic Terrorism In The Middle East

“Faith and luck were in short supply in Iran in the late 1940s and early fifties. The end of the Second World War did not usher in peace or stability but instead hurled Iran into the treacherous currents of the Cold War. Iran’s oil wealth and its proximity to the Soviet Union and the Persian Gulf made the country a prize worth fighting for. Though the wartime allies had signed a pact to evacuate their forces from Iranian territory within six months of Germany’s defeat, Stalin decided to test British and American resolve by keeping Russian troops on the ground supporting a puppet Communist state in the northern province of Azerbaijan. It was only in the face of tough diplomatic pressure from the Truman administration that Moscow backed down and Azerbaijan was liberated from Communist rule. This first major international crisis of the Cold War convinced the Shah and the army generals that they should cultivate close ties with the United States if Iran was to avoid falling behind the Iron Curtain.” – Andrew Scott Cooper, “The Fall of Heaven: The Pahlavis and the Final Days of Imperial Iran” 2018, Picador, pg. 65.

“As Russia becomes increasingly embroiled in its own neighborhood, Moscow can decrease its priorities in the WANA region. For instance, Russia has called the mercenaries from the Wagner Group, which was heavily involved in Africa and West Asia, to participate in the war in Ukraine to the detriment of Russian ambitions in the WANA region. Notably, President Putin has already once exhibited his inclination to withdraw Russian troops from Syria.

The withdrawal of Russia from the region can lead to a decrease in the power of Iran and destabilize the Assad regime as well as the position of Haftar. The Western countries can also employ stringent sanctions against Russian allies. There can also reprisals against Russian allies in the region as was witnessed after the USSR withdrew from Afghanistan. The unrest caused by the reprisals can provide the space for US or Chinese allies to acquire more power and influence. Countries in the region are also looking for alternatives to grain and oil imported from Russia and Ukraine, which could decrease dependencies over time.

Furthermore, Russia can lose control of its leverage over Saudi Arabia over the hydrocarbons as Russia not only controls its own hydrocarbons but also the reserves of Syria and Libya as well. Terrorism can also increase in the traditional Russian sphere of influence in Central Asia. This concern emanates from the capabilities and reach of countries in the WANA region such as Iran that have the power to cause disruption in Central Asian nations. As Russian influence deteriorates from the region, its leverage over these countries declines as well.

Central Asian countries are at the “nexus of a number of interlocking regions,” including the WANA region, where Russian retrenchment can contribute to intensification of instability and the creation of a haven for violent nonstate actors. Russia’s withdrawal is also likely to be the Russian abandonment of its great-power ambitions and will provide regional powers such as Turkey and Israel along with great powers the United States and China opportunity to thrive.” – Arushi Singh, “Rivalry Further Afield: The Probable Consequences of Great-Power Competition in the West Asia and North Africa Region” Journal of Indo-Pacific Affairs, June 1, 2022.

Making sense of events in Syria is not possible without having a historical understanding of the Western-Russian rivalry. 

Over the course of the last two centuries this civilizational clash has produced spillover geopolitical and political effects in Eastern Europe, South Asia, West Asia, Central Asia, and North Africa. 

The policy of fighting and isolating Russia, which Britain has spearheaded, has caused immense suffering for the people caught in the middle, with Ukraine being the latest example. 

That poor nation was brainwashed and turned into mercenaries in a span of a couple of decades after the Soviets fell. Washington used the Ukrainians’ anti-Communist feelings, which were real and justified, to full effect by casting the new, Christian Russia under Putin in the old light.

And there are many more examples of such psychological trickery and geopolitical engineering. 

After WWII, the British created the state of Pakistan upon their departure from India for the sole reason of preventing Russia access to the Indian Ocean. 

They believed India wouldn’t put up a fight if Russia invaded south so they created a garrison state and a military dictatorship to prevent such a scenario. Like the Ukrainians, the Pakistanis have proven to be useful mercenaries for London and Washington.

The official excuse they gave for this new Frankensteinian state was to give Indian Muslims their own homeland, but securing the West’s geopolitical interests in Central Asia and South Asia was the real reason. 

Later on, in the 1970s, the regional and global consequences of the creation of Pakistan became apparent when Afghanistan sled into chaos. Islamic terrorist forces operating out of Islamabad brought mayhem and destruction to the peaceful country. 

Since the socialist government in Kabul was a Russian ally, the United States and the West saw nothing wrong with developments there. They encouraged the Pakistanis, and added fuel to the fire by supplying the terrorist groups with arms and money. 

The strategy worked. Russia was dealt a severe blow to its image in Afghanistan. 1989 saw the collapse of the Soviet Union and the rise of Islamic fanatics in Central Asia. And the West was more than willing to live with that awful reality. 

When it was faced with a similar dilemma in Iran a decade before—either the acceptance of a Communist regime friendly to Russia or a band of clerics hostile to the West—Washington chose the later option. 

In both cases, in Afghanistan and Iran, America and the West preferred to empower Islamic terrorists rather than cede crucial geopolitical space to the Russian orbit. 

But they weren’t successful forever with their clever schemes. History has a way of playing tricks on tricksters. The rogue clerics in Tehran have allied with Moscow in a number of conflicts after the demise of the Soviet Union. And the Taliban has also been accommodating with the Kremlin. Russia’s potential decision to remove it from its terrorism list could hearld better relations in the future. 

A similar scenario could play out in Syria if its new Islamic rulers truly act in the interests of Syria and its people instead of foreign powers. So far they have proven to be nothing more than vassals so expect the worst. 

Syria under Al-Qaeda leadership will be a mercenary state, much like Ukraine and Pakistan. Its foreign policy will be dictated by London and Washington, and that means saying goodbye to Russia in the Mediterranean.