Commentary
When democracies and autocracies are seen as interchangeable targets, the language of democracy becomes hollow, and the incentives for democratic governance erode.
Sarah Yerkes, Amr Hamzawy
{
"authors": [
"Andrew S. Weiss"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center",
"Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "",
"programs": [
"Russia and Eurasia"
],
"projects": [
"Eurasia in Transition"
],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"Middle East",
"Syria",
"Russia",
"Levant"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Security",
"Foreign Policy",
"Global Governance"
]
}
In The Media
Russia’s Position on Syria
Russia’s position on Syria is based in large part on Moscow’s concerns about the political repercussions of intervention. At the G20 Summit, Vladimir Putin attempted to create a de facto referendum on intervention.
Published on Sep 6, 2013
Source: WBEZ’s Worldview
Speaking on WBEZ Worldwide, Carnegie’s Andrew Weiss explained that Russia’s position on Syrian intervention has several origins: worries about the precedent created by a possible U.S. intervention, Russia’s greater sympathy for Shia Muslims, and concerns about Syria’s possible collapse and the shockwaves such an event would create. He explained that Russian President Vladimir Putin’s placing of Syria on the agenda at the G20 Summit was an attempt to create a referendum on Syrian intervention, much like the one carried out in the British parliament. Weiss cast doubt on the idea that the United States’ possible failure to intervene in Syria would be a major win for Putin, noting that foreign policy issues have a low salience in Russian society.
Political ReformSecurityForeign PolicyGlobal GovernanceNorth AmericaUnited StatesMiddle EastSyriaRussiaLevant
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- The Dangerous Consequences of Treating Colombia Like Venezuela
- Has Trump the Destroyer Eclipsed Putin the Destroyer?Commentary
Unexpectedly, Trump’s America appears to have replaced Putin’s Russia’s as the world’s biggest disruptor.
Alexander Baunov
- Are All Wars Now Drone Wars?Commentary
From Sudan to Ukraine, UAVs have upended warfighting tactics and become one of the most destructive weapons of conflict.
Jon Bateman, Steve Feldstein
- Carney’s Remarkable Message to Middle PowersCommentary
And how they can respond.
- +1
Sophia Besch, Steve Feldstein, Stewart Patrick, …
- The Greenland Episode Must Be a Lesson for Europe and NATOCommentary
They cannot return to the comforts of asymmetric reliance, dressed up as partnership.
Sophia Besch
