Originally I believe the plan was to attack Iran first - that was in the papers they had mapped out back then. At some point they must have decided that Syria (along with other regimes in the Middle East that they didn't trust like Libya) had to fall first. But I think they didn't expect the Assad regime to last more than a decade after a color revolution...
The events leading up to Assad's fall last year do suggest that they were sick of waiting and wanted to fast track the process.
I also think the 2008 crash and related events might have delayed things for a while too, because the Arab Spring wasn't put into motion until 2011.
Login to reply
Replies (1)
right - they had an overall vision for the Middle East but they had to adjust the strategy based on developments on the ground
also don't forget that Russia is a key piece of the puzzle in the Middle East as well because for example Iranian foreign minister is Moscow right now for talks with Putin
and of course it seems Assad has been preparing to escape to Russia for a long time before he actually did so. by the time he moved to Russia he already had businesses there apparently etc.
so the developments in Ukraine would also have to be figured into the timeline for the Middle East due to Syria and Iran's cooperation with Russia.
Syria used Russian surface to air missiles and Russia is using Iranian drones and of course Russia was heavily involved in Iran's nuclear program and Israel downed an entire jumbo jet full of Russian Nuclear scientists etc.
Every time something major like that happens they have to re-evaluate their strategy but the vision stays the same.