Syrian President Bashar Assad’s 24-year rule was dramatically overturned on Sunday as rebel forces swiftly seized Damascus, forcing Assad to flee to Moscow. This upheaval has placed Russia’s strategic interests in Syria under significant threat, jeopardizing Russian military installations and geopolitical influence.
Key Russian positions, including air and naval bases in Aleppo, Hama, and Homs, are now at risk as the balance of power in the region is reshaped by the rebel advance. The escalating conflict and the collapse of the regime mark a pivotal moment in Syria’s ongoing war, signaling a profound challenge to Russia’s long-standing dominance as a backer in the Middle East.
Russia’s ties with Syria date back decades. “Syria was a Soviet and later Russian ally in the fight against the United States and in advancing interests in the Middle East,” political scientist Leonid Goldenberg told The Media Line. “Of course, it was also about countering Israel, a US ally. That’s why, for decades, Russia supported the Assad regime.”
Nir Boms, chair of the Syria Research Forum at Tel Aviv University’s Moshe Dayan Center, said that Russian forces have pulled out and taken their assets with them over the last several days. “They’ve not cleared all their bases, but they’re certainly preparing for the thought that their influence will be diminished,” he told The Media Line.
He said that it was still unclear whether Russia had totally evacuated from Syria.
Russia's investments in Syria
Boms noted that assets like the Khmeimim Air Base, the naval facility in Tartus, and the port in Latakia are pivotal to Russia’s presence in the Mediterranean and the Middle East.
Those assets are just some examples of the extensive resources that Russia invested in Syria. “Russia spent enormous amounts of money and resources in Syria,” Goldenberg said. “This included the lives of Russian soldiers—viewed as expendable resources—and significant financial investments. All of it has gone down the drain. These funds could have been used to improve the lives of Russian citizens, build better alliances, or strengthen the country domestically. Instead, they were squandered for objectives that ultimately failed.”
“Russia tried to salvage its assets by calling them part of the opposition,” he said. “But the reality is clear: they’ve been forced to retreat, and their ability to maintain influence in the region has collapsed.”
Russia’s involvement in Syria was part of an effort to show off its global influence. “During the civil war in the 2000s, Russia saw Syria as an opportunity to demonstrate its military strength in a foreign country. At that time, Russia showcased its arsenal, precision missile strikes, and the capabilities of the Wagner forces in powerful combat scenarios,” Goldenberg said.
“This was about projecting the image of Russia as a global power capable of solving international problems and supporting allies like Assad,” he continued. “They wanted to show they could handle conflicts and other global issues, distinguishing themselves as a superpower.”
Economic factors in the Middle East also influenced Russia’s interest in the region. “Russia planned to use Syria and Turkey for pipelines to Europe, but as we know, the gas pipeline project failed long ago,” Goldenberg said. “Initially, they supported Assad to ensure competitors couldn’t bring pipelines through Syria into Europe. Ironically, Russia has now lost most of its European gas market, so this reason is no longer relevant.”
Goldenberg said that Russia’s retreat makes clear how much the war in Ukraine has strained the country. “This proves that Russia lacks the resources to open another front,” he said. “They can’t even manage a symbolic air campaign to save face.”
Boms also noted that Ukraine has become more strategically important to Russia than Syria. “But Syria is also important for Russia in terms of holding an empire, or whatever they want to call themselves,” he said. “It has an air base, it has a naval facility, it has a few other places where they kept power. It’s a big blow for them if they’re going to lose it. They’ve gambled on it. They have assets there, they have planes there, they have weapons there, and they have influence there. Russia is losing that.”
Russia was just one of the countries backing Syria, several of which have been stretched thin. Goldenberg said that the strain on Syria’s backers made the collapse of the Assad regime inevitable.
“With Iran overstretched and Russia bogged down in Ukraine, Assad’s forces were left with no real support,” he said. “The reason for Assad’s fall is complex, but it boils down to the weakening of the two pillars holding up his regime: Iranian proxies and Russian military support. Without them, the Syrian army could no longer sustain itself.”
The decline of Russian and Iranian influence in Syria has far-reaching implications for the Middle East. “This loss undermines trust in Russia and Iran as reliable allies. If countries like Saudi Arabia or others are deciding whether to align with them, they’ll now see how unreliable they are,” Goldenberg said. “Assad made his bet on them, and it failed.”
The fall of the Assad regime will have implications for Israel’s security. “The Assad regime was a pro-Iranian regime and part of the chain of enemies surrounding us,” Goldenberg said. “Its fall removes one link from that chain. For now, Israel is likely to adopt a wait-and-see approach, but it’s also possible that communication channels with rebel groups are being quietly established.”
Despite the many geopolitical players involved in Syria, Boms said that the conflict in the region is unlikely to expand into a broader conflict between Russia and the West.Russia is expected to try and maintain its influence in Syria, even as it faces increasing challenges and declining credibility.
“Russia’s inability to sustain its assets in Syria is a public admission of its declining power. This also affects its credibility as an ally in other parts of the world,” Goldenberg said. “The Middle East is witnessing the collapse of the Assad regime and, with it, a significant reduction in Russia’s ability to project power. The consequences will shape the region’s political landscape for years to come.”