Russia, Israel Exchange ‘Ukrainian Letters’ in Syria

A Russian military patrol in northern Syria. Asharq Al-Awsat
A Russian military patrol in northern Syria. Asharq Al-Awsat
TT

Russia, Israel Exchange ‘Ukrainian Letters’ in Syria

A Russian military patrol in northern Syria. Asharq Al-Awsat
A Russian military patrol in northern Syria. Asharq Al-Awsat

Each wave of Israeli raids on Syria in the past years had been weighty. But the latest attacks, which occurred on Friday night, had an additional significance. Syria, in fact, has turned into a “letter box” between Russia and Israel, as a result of tension over Ukraine on the one hand, and Iran’s efforts to “fill the vacuum” in Syria, on the other.

The most powerful Russian message came on May 13, when Israel launched raids in Syria. In an unprecedented move, the Hmeimim base operated the advanced S-300 missile system, and targeted Israeli bombers as soon as the raids stopped. It was the first time that the Russian base used one of its three systems - the S-300, the advanced S-300, and the S-400 - since its deployment in Syria following the military intervention at the end of 2015.

This is an important development, especially as Moscow had given pledges to Tel Aviv that it would control the command room of the missile system in Syria, and prevent its fall into the grip of the Syrian Air Force, which operates the old systems such as the S-200 and below.

These understandings were underlined following efforts to alleviate Russian-Israeli tension in the wake of the targeting of a Russian plane in western Syria in September 2018.

But why did Moscow change its behavior? Why did Mikhail Bogdanov, the envoy of Russian President Vladimir Putin, deny reports of the use of the system against Israeli planes?

According to a senior Western official, intelligence reports confirm that the Hmeimim base operated the system, in a rare incident, “because Russia wanted to tell Israel that its ability to chase Iranian targets was linked to Moscow’s decision, and that it should take this into consideration when taking a stance over the Ukrainian file.”

Since the outbreak of the Russian war in Ukraine, Tel Aviv has tried to play a “balanced role” and refused to hand over the Iron Dome to Kyiv. However, as the bombing intensified, political signs and an escalatory rhetoric emerged, along with talk of military support and the presence of Israeli “mercenaries” or experts alongside the Ukrainian army, followed by a diplomatic rift.

At this moment, Moscow sent a message to Tel Aviv through the “Syrian box.” The response - which came in the form of the Israeli bombing – was aimed at “testing the resolve” of the Russian side, along with a determination to chase “Iranian targets” in Syria. In fact, the latest raids on Friday were broader and more comprehensive than the previous ones, because they targeted points in the countryside of Damascus and central and western Syria, leading to the killing of Syrian officers.

Despite Bogdanov’s denials and claims that Western reports were “lies,” the Russian reminder not only affected Israel, but also included hints to Damascus and Tehran that the military-air decision remained in Moscow.
This comes following the intense exchange of visits between Syrian and Iranian officials in recent weeks, including the visit of President Bashar al-Assad to Tehran, to work on “filling the Russian vacuum.”

The reminder also highlighted Israel’s adherence to its “red lines” in the phase shifting between the Russian withdrawal and Iranian advances.

President Putin wants to say that despite his preoccupation with Ukraine, he has not forgotten Syria and its “players.” Or perhaps he wants to use it to improve his position in his great war in “Little Russia”.
Here, it was remarkable that after Jordanian officials announced that they had noticed a decline in the Russian military presence in southern Syria, with the possibility that Iran and its militias would advance to “fill the vacuum,” the Hmeimim base rushed to conduct Russian military patrols on the Syrian-Jordanian border.

The same can be said about the Russian messages to Turkey. The Hmeimim planes target from time to time areas of Turkish influence in northern Syria, to remind Ankara of the Russian papers when it reviews its decisions and options regarding the Dardanelles and Bosphorus corridors to the Black Sea, and when it discusses the request of Sweden and Finland to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).

So far, Putin has been able to use Syria as a “letter box” and a platform to pressure players in Ukraine. Only time will tell whether Russia would be capable of maintaining this strategy, if the Ukrainian land turns into a “swamp” for the Russian forces, impacting the Russian depth and the theaters of the Middle East.



Sidelined by Trump, Macron Tries to Rally Europe on Ukraine. But Divisions Run Deep

French President Emmanuel Macron welcomes Germany's Chancellor Olaf Scholz before an informal summit of European leaders to discuss the situation in Ukraine and European security at the Élysée Presidential Palace in Paris on February 17, 2025. (AFP)
French President Emmanuel Macron welcomes Germany's Chancellor Olaf Scholz before an informal summit of European leaders to discuss the situation in Ukraine and European security at the Élysée Presidential Palace in Paris on February 17, 2025. (AFP)
TT

Sidelined by Trump, Macron Tries to Rally Europe on Ukraine. But Divisions Run Deep

French President Emmanuel Macron welcomes Germany's Chancellor Olaf Scholz before an informal summit of European leaders to discuss the situation in Ukraine and European security at the Élysée Presidential Palace in Paris on February 17, 2025. (AFP)
French President Emmanuel Macron welcomes Germany's Chancellor Olaf Scholz before an informal summit of European leaders to discuss the situation in Ukraine and European security at the Élysée Presidential Palace in Paris on February 17, 2025. (AFP)

French President Emmanuel Macron painted a veneer of European unity by inviting a small number of handpicked European leaders to the Élysée Palace, while the Trump administration sidelined the continent by moving ahead with direct negotiations on Tuesday with Russia on the war in Ukraine. But beneath the diplomatic pageantry, cracks in European consensus were hard to ignore.

One question loomed: Could Europe take charge of its own security, or would it remain reactive to US and Russian decisions?

From Macron’s push for European-led defense to Keir Starmer’s “third way” diplomacy, Giorgia Meloni’s balancing act between Brussels and Washington, and Olaf Scholz’s resistance to breaking with NATO, Europe remains divided on its next move.

France – Macron seeks to take the lead

By hosting the Monday summit in his Parisian palace, Macron reinforced his image of the imperial French “Sun King” and his bid to become the dominant voice on Ukraine and European security. With Germany’s Scholz politically weakened, the UK outside the EU, and Italy leaning toward Trump, Macron has emerged as the bloc’s most vocal advocate for strategic autonomy.

With a presidential mandate until 2027 and France’s nuclear arsenal making it Europe’s only atomic power, Macron has positioned himself as the only leader with both the ambition and authority to act. His proposal for a European-led security force in Ukraine, even in a limited training and logistics role, fits into his broader push for a continent less dependent on Washington.

But forging consensus is proving difficult: Germany is resisting, key frontline EU nations were left out of the summit, and Trump’s unpredictability clouds Europe’s security outlook.

“Since his first term, Macron has sought to impose himself as Europe’s strongman,” said French political analyst Jean-Yves Camus. “He has always presented himself as the natural leader of liberals against nationalist populists. One cannot say that this has worked well.”

While Macron is setting the stage, the question remains: Is Europe ready to follow?

United Kingdom – Starmer’s ‘third way’ strategy

Keir Starmer is charting a different course, positioning himself as Europe’s key link to Washington — while maintaining a firm pro-Ukraine stance.

Having met Trump before the election —“I like him a lot,” the US president said — the British prime minister is set to travel to Washington next week in what some see as an effort to bridge the US-Europe divide, and a hallmark of the “special relationship.”

While Trump moves toward de-escalation in Ukraine, Starmer is doubling down on support for Kyiv, stating the UK is “ready and willing” to send British troops if necessary. This stance stands in contrast to Macron and Scholz’s more cautious approach.

Starmer’s surprising decision not to sign a key international declaration on the future of AI last week — aligning with the US rather than the EU — has raised questions about whether Britain is shifting closer to Washington on broader geopolitical issues.

“The UK is unique in that it’s practically the only major ally that Trump hasn’t purposefully antagonized since his inauguration,” said Anand Sundar, a special advisor at the European Council on Foreign Relations. “The Starmer government is doing everything it can to not put a target on its back.”

Some analysts suggest Starmer is positioning himself as Trump’s European “whisperer,” able to influence the White House while staying in step with Europe.

Italy – Meloni’s balancing act

Giorgia Meloni, the only leader of a major European economy to attend Trump’s inauguration in January, arrived late to the Paris summit and left without making a public statement - moves observers saw as signs of skepticism toward the meeting.

According to Italian news agency ANSA, Meloni questioned why the summit was held in Paris rather than Brussels, the EU’s natural decision-making hub, and criticized the exclusion of frontline states such as the Baltic nations, Sweden, and Finland.

At the summit, she pushed back against deploying European troops to Ukraine, calling it “the most complex and least effective option” - especially without firm security guarantees for Kyiv.

Observers noted that Meloni echoed some of US Vice President JD Vance’s criticism of Europe’s reliance on US protection. “We shouldn’t be asking what the Americans can do for us, but what we must do for ourselves,” she said, according to ANSA.

Despite her skepticism, Meloni still engaged in the talks, bringing Italy’s concerns over long-term European military commitments to the table.

Hungary – Orban’s absence

Notably absent from the Paris talks was Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, a close Trump ally and frequent critic of EU policies.

While no official reason was given for his exclusion, some observers saw it as a pointed message from Paris and its European allies about the limits of engagement with leaders seen as too closely aligned with Trump’s worldview.

Germany – Scholz’s irritation

If Macron is stepping forward, Scholz is pushing back.

At the summit, the German Chancellor rejected Macron’s proposal for a European-led security force in Ukraine, calling it “completely premature” and “highly inappropriate” given the ongoing war.

Scholz didn’t hide his frustration, saying he was “a little irritated” that peacekeeping forces were even being discussed “at the wrong time.” He insisted NATO—not an independent European force—must remain the foundation of security.

Due to its historical legacy from the world wars, some argue that Germany has always been willing to cede European security leadership to France, a role the French have pursued since President Charle de Gaulle.

At the same time, the debate over military spending is intensifying, as NATO officials stress the alliance’s 2% GDP target is now a baseline rather than a cap.