Vladimir Putin’s decision to pull Russian troops out of Syria hit the headlines around the world. But it should have been expected. Official statements said from the beginning that the operation would last only a limited time, that there would be no permanent extensive military presence, that the purpose was not to support Bashar al-Assad’s regime but to save the country’s statehood and that the future would have to be determined by the Syrian people through political talks. What they said then is actually happening.
俄罗斯总统弗拉基米尔•普京(Vladimir Putin)从叙利亚撤军的决定登上了世界各地的新闻头条。但这一决定本应在预料之中。俄罗斯官方声明从一开始就表示，此番军事行动只会持续有限时间，俄军不会在叙利亚建立永久、广泛的军事存在，其目的并非要支持巴沙尔•阿萨德(Bashar al-Assad)政权，而是为了维护叙利亚的国家地位，这个国家的未来须由其人民通过政治谈判决定。他们当时所说的话现在真的在兑现。
So why now? The question of an exit strategy has been raised throughout the operation, and Mr Putin felt the time was right. Looking back, one can see why. The Syrian regime had had to be fortified because, Russia believed, the spread of radical Islam could be stopped only by strengthening statehood; the Syrian government is internationally recognised and Moscow had offered to help it. Russian aircraft bombed its opponents — Isis and other militant groups — but the mission took longer than planned because Syria’s army was less combat-ready than expected. Eventually, the situation was reversed, allowing Russia to reduce its presence and its responsibility for the future.
那么，为什么现在撤军？何时撤军的问题贯穿于此次军事行动始终，而普京感觉现在时机到了。回顾过去，我们可以看到原因。叙利亚政权当时之所以必须得到巩固，是因为俄罗斯相信，要阻止激进伊斯兰教的蔓延，只能依靠加强叙利亚国家地位；当前的叙利亚政府得到国际认可，于是莫斯科向其伸出了援手。俄军战机轰炸了叙利亚政府的对手——“伊斯兰国”(ISIS)及其他激进组织——但行动时间超出了原定计划，因为叙利亚军队的作战能力比预想得要低。最终，战场上的局势出现了逆转，使俄罗斯可以减少其军事存在以及对叙利亚未来所负的责任。
What are the results? The Assad regime has been saved from collapse and increased the territory it controls. The change in the balance of forces on the ground has inspired hope for genuine talks; it is well known that some parties seriously consider political deals only when military victory becomes implausible. The opposition can no longer hope to win militarily, and neither can the regime after Russian troops leave. Syria needs profound reforms to recover a viable statehood and few in Moscow believe the present regime will last long without changes. Russia’s pullout is a signal to the Syrian authorities that it will not do their work for them.
俄军干预的结果如何？阿萨德政权免于倒台，并扩大了控制的版图。战场力量对比的变化激发了对于展开切实谈判的希望；众所周知，只有军事胜利变得无望时，各方才会认真考虑政治协议。反对派无法再指望能取得军事上的胜利，俄军撤出后，阿萨德政权也无法打垮反对派。叙利亚需要进行深刻的改革，以重建一个有效的全国性政权，莫斯科的决策者几乎都认为，如不进行改革，叙利亚现政权维持不了多久。俄罗斯的撤军向叙利亚当局发出一个信号——莫斯科不会越俎代庖。
Russia had started the operation under the slogan of combating Isis — but this task became secondary and the war was essentially waged for Syria itself. The main question was whether statehood could recover as a sustainable, gov-ernable entity. The approach assumed any destruction of the administrative structure would be the result of the regime’s deposition and chaos could ensue. Still, efforts by Moscow in Syria and the US-led coalition in Iraq did stop the spread of Isis. To secure its defeat, more is needed. Air strikes are not enough; a ground campaign and ideally joint efforts by the regime and opposition must follow. This can be achieved only through a political process.
俄罗斯是在打击ISIS的口号下开始此番军事行动的，但这一任务已成为次要，这场仗本质上是为叙利亚本身而打的。当时的主要问题在于，叙利亚国家政权能否重建成为一个可持续、能治理的实体。这种看法认为，叙利亚政权倒台会导致国家行政架构不同程度的破坏，接着便会出现混乱。不过，莫斯科在叙利亚的行动，加上美国为首的联军在伊拉克的行动，的确阻止了ISIS的蔓延。为了确保打败ISIS，还需要更多的行动。只靠空袭还不够；地面行动必须跟上，最好还有叙利亚政权与反对派的联合行动。只有通过政治进程才能实现此类行动。
Can Mr Assad survive without Russia? It will not leave completely. There have been two recent similar situations. When the US pulled out of Iraq completely, the country fell apart and Isis emerged. When the US withdrew most of its troops from Afghanistan but left a serious military presence, it kept the country together despite all its problems. Russia should keep its military infrastructure and a contingent of forces in Syria to guarantee the regime will not collapse. Moscow has learnt its lessons.
没有俄罗斯的支持，阿萨德能坚持下去吗？俄军不会完全撤离。我们曾见过两种相似的情形。美军全部撤出伊拉克后，伊拉克陷入了分崩离析，ISIS开始崛起。美国从阿富汗撤出了大部分军队，但在当地保留了一支强大的军事存在，后者保证了阿富汗的完整性，尽管这个国家也存在各种问题。俄罗斯应当在叙利亚保留军事基础设施以及一支军事力量，以确保叙利亚政权不会倒台。莫斯科在这方面已经有过经验教训。
What are the political results? Russia has proved to be an influential international operator. The agenda for discussion with the west has widened. Before the Syria campaign, it focused mainly on the Ukraine peace process — a peripheral issue compared with the Middle East. It would be naive to expect a “Ukraine for Syria” bargain, but there is no doubt Moscow is taken more seriously than six months ago, and this will have an impact on the Ukrainian talks.
政治结局将如何？俄罗斯已被证明是一个有影响力的国际事务参与者。与西方国家的谈判议程已经扩大。在对叙利亚进行军事干预前，俄罗斯主要聚焦于乌克兰和平进程——与中东相比只是一个边缘问题。期待一个“以乌克兰换叙利亚”的协议是不切实际的，但毫无疑问，比起6个月前，西方如今更加重视莫斯科，这将对乌克兰问题的谈判产生影响。
Do the Geneva peace talks have any future? That Russia is distancing itself from Mr Assad while not giving up on him is a positive sign. Syria will change, and Moscow will be able to interact not only with Assad’s regime but also with a broader array of actors. Coupled with intensive diplomatic efforts between Moscow, Washington and Riyadh, this will provide a chance for a settlement.
日内瓦和谈会有戏吗？俄罗斯在不放弃阿萨德的同时又与其保持距离，这是一个积极信号。叙利亚将发生变革，莫斯科将不但能与阿萨德政权互动，也能与更广泛的相关参与者互动。再加上莫斯科、华盛顿与利雅得之间密集的外交努力，这将为解决叙利亚问题提供新的契机。