Syria’s Conflict: Putin’s vs. Obama’s Position

Introduction

Syria had been involved in a serious and devastating conflict for more than four years now. Despite the fact that the conflict refers to the Syrian government and its opposition, there are numerous countries that are involved in this was as well. Russia and the United States of America especially show interest and participate in the development of combat operations on the territory of Syria.

These two countries hold the opposing positions: the President of the United States support the Syrian opposition while the President of Russia directs the efforts and the military force towards supporting the government of Syria. The leaders of these nations have expressed their opinion during the recent UN conference on the issue of the Syrian conflict on 29 September 2015. Moreover, they have different leader positions, leadership style, and the decision-making process.

Putin’s position on Syria

In June 2010 Vladimir Putin claimed that Russia does not support “any side [in the conflict] from which the threat of a civil war may emerge” (“Russia Denies Arming Syria” par. 2). However, in January 2014 Russia started to provide help for Syrian government by “supplying new armored vehicles, surveillance equipment, radars, electronic warfare systems, spare parts for helicopters, and various weapons including guided bombs for planes”.

On 30 September 2015 Putin received approval from Russian Parliament for initiating military intervention against the Syrian opposition, such as ISIL, the Al-Nusra Front, etc. Vladimir Putin is believed to have the intentions of the rapid implementation of military forces into the conflict; thus establishing the Russian political and military influence and confronting the USA and its authority.

Obama’s position on Syria

During the UN Conference on Syria, the President of the United States demonstrated a vigorous justification of the diplomacy implementing. Moreover, he berated Russian strategy in his commentary for its defense of the government of Syria. “Dangerous currents risk pulling us back into a darker, more disordered world,” Mr. Obama said (Harris par. 4). He included that by currents he meant extensive powers that are disregarding universal rules and dictating peace by the means of military intervention. “In accordance with this logic, we should support tyrants like Bashar al-Assad who drops barrel bombs to massacre innocent civilians because the alternative is surely worse,” he said in comments that seemed to be aimed directly at Mr. Putin (Harris par. 6).

The leadership style and decision-making

The President of the United States is considered to embody the contingency style of the leadership, as he has acted in discrete approaches for assorted situations. Furthermore, the position of Mr. Obama towards Syrian conflict and the intervention of Putin is controversial, as he claims that the military interference of Russia is incorrect and ill-advised.

However, the United States had been involved in the Syrian conflict since 2012 under the pretext of the implementation of democracy. Obama justifies the interference of the United States on the side of the Syrian opposition as an act of bringing peace to the country.

Vladimir Putin’s style is aggressive and challenging, as he has placed his military forces on the Syrian territories almost instantly, trying to bring America to choose whether to support or to reject his authority. However, personally I and almost the whole world tend to share the Obama’s position: “if you think that running your economy into the ground and having to send troops in order to prop up your only ally is leadership, then we’ve got a different definition of leadership” (Harris par. 7).

Works Cited

Harris, Gardiner. Obama and Putin Play Diplomatic Poker over Syria. 2015. Web.

Russia Denies Arming Syria 2012. Web.