What Trump means for US-Russia ties in Middle East?

By Emre Ersen

- The writer is an associate professor in the Department of Political Science and International Relations at Marmara University in Istanbul.

ISTANBUL (AA) - The inauguration of Donald Trump as U.S. president on Jan. 20 is expected to create a breakthrough in U.S.-Russia relations, which significantly deteriorated in the last years of Barack Obama’s presidency.

Although Obama initially followed a policy of “reset” aimed at rapprochement between Washington and Moscow, that policy was abandoned after 2012 after Russia’s annexation of Ukraine and the growing conflict in Syria.

Against this backdrop, it was significant that during his presidential campaign Trump repeatedly expressed his admiration for Vladimir Putin and said he would consider lifting U.S. sanctions imposed on Russia over its involvement in Ukraine.

After Trump won the presidential race in November, Putin was one of the first leaders to congratulate him for his victory.

In a further sign of Trump’s friendly approach to Moscow he picked Rex Tillerson, the CEO of Exxon Mobil, as his nominee for secretary of state. Tillerson is known to have built close ties with both Putin and Igor Sechin, the head of oil giant Rosneft and a close Putin ally.

These links were highlighted in 2013 when Putin awarded Tillerson the Order of Friendship.

The likelihood of a close relationship between the White House and the Kremlin comes as the Middle East continues to dominate U.S.-Russia relations. Some believe Trump’s promise to “make America great again” has significant implications for foreign policy in the Middle East and could see Trump play a much more active role in the region than Obama did.

Although the Soviet Union enjoyed significant influence in the Middle East during the Cold War, Russia failed to play a prominent regional role in the 1990s due to domestic problems.

However, after Putin came to power in 2000 he reversed this passive stance and worked to improve Moscow’s political, military and economic relations with countries such as Turkey, Iran and Syria. During this period, Russia also became more active in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and improved ties simultaneously with Hamas and Tel Aviv.

The turning point for Russia’s rising influence in the Middle East, however, came with the Syrian civil war.

As Washington refrained from putting “boots on the ground” and confined itself to providing military support to the opposition, Daesh managed to seize large swathes of land in both Syria and Iraq.

- Russia’s return to Middle East

Conversely, Moscow and Tehran gave significant military backing to the regime of Bashar al-Assad, whose rule was rejected by Washington and its allies.

In August 2013, Obama’s “red line” was crossed when a sarin gas attack in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta killed hundreds of civilians. The rocket strike was widely blamed on Assad forces although the regime has continued to deny allegations of chemical attacks.

The U.S. failed to take military action and settled for an agreement brokered by Moscow to dispose of Assad’s chemical weapons.

The geopolitical void created by Obama’s inaction over Syria has been largely filled by Putin, who launched direct airstrikes to prop up the Assad regime in September 2015.

In a little more than a year, Russian intervention has enabled Assad to achieve a significant edge over his opponents and allowed Russia to acquire a military air base in Latakia and to modernize its Soviet-era naval facility at Tartus.

Moscow has also boosted its diplomatic influence at international talks on Syria as well as its regional leverage through strengthened ties with Iran, Egypt and Israel. Even in Baghdad, where the U.S. had enjoyed significant political and military influence since 2003, Russia and Iran have established a regional center to coordinate the fight against Daesh.

Trump provided significant clues about his future Middle East policy during the campaign.

Most importantly, he signaled that Washington’s focus in Syria would shift further towards combating Daesh rather than supporting the opposition or trying to remove Assad from power.

Criticizing Obama’s policy in Syria, he described the U.S. as “backing rebels against Syria and we have no idea who these people are.” It is no surprise that Assad welcomed Trump’s election and said the U.S. could become “a natural ally” in fighting terrorism.

Trump also indicated that he would strike a deal with Putin to defeat Daesh. Since the two countries formerly cooperated against al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan, such an agreement may not be difficult to reach in the short-term.

- Fellow strongmen?

A rapprochement between Trump and Assad would not be surprising either considering the president-elect is known to be open to the idea of cooperating with regional strongmen. He has already developed good relations with Egyptian President Abdel-Fattah al-Sisi, for instance.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should also be pleased as Trump previously declared his intention to move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and adopted a pro-Israel stance regarding the peace process with Palestine.

Since Putin also enjoys good relations with Sisi and Netanyahu, the inclusion of Trump as another strongman in this picture may pave the way for a new regional dialogue between Moscow and Washington.

However, the issue of Iran is likely to complicate U.S.-Russia cooperation in the Middle East in the short-term as both Trump and the leading members of his team have harshly criticized the regime in Tehran and the nuclear deal signed in 2015.

Trump called the agreement a “disaster” and said he would “tear it up” once in office but Iran’s close partnership with Russia means it will be a significant challenge for Trump to improve ties with Russia while striving to punish Iran.

There are other contradictions in Trump’s statements about the Middle East.

He has repeatedly said that Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries should pay more for the security protection they receive from the U.S. His softer stance towards Assad has also raised concerns in Riyadh, where the Saudi government has been a firm supporter of the Syrian opposition, alongside Turkey and Qatar.

At the same time, Trump’s opposition to Tehran would be a much-welcomed development for Riyadh, especially when it has been steadily losing ground to regional rival Iran in Syria and Yemen.

There is no doubt that such contradictions, as well as Trump’s well-known unpredictability, are being closely watched by the Kremlin. Although there is a certain degree of affinity between Trump and Putin, the hawkish Republican figures who are expected to dominate Trump’s Cabinet will most likely urge him to follow a tougher line against Russia in the Middle East.

The future of U.S.-Russia relations will lie in Trump’s ability to convince his own team as well as the Republican majority in Congress of the benefits of closer cooperation with Putin in the Middle East.

* Opinions expressed in this piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Anadolu Agency's editorial policy.