Vladimir Putin was right. The collapse of the Soviet Union was "a major geopolitical disaster of the (2oth) century." Not only did the socialist revolutions and independence movements throughout the Global South lose an invaluable line of material support, but the world also lost the most formidable challenge to US hegemony. At least until now.
Over the last four years, the United States and their allies have promoted regime change in Syria. NATO countries provide the terrorists with training and equipment, Turkey in particular provides logistical and air support, while the Gulf monarchies provide the financing. All of this while repeating the now infamous chorus, "Assad must go." When Washington said that Saddam Hussein must go, he went. When they said that Muammar Gaddafi must go, he went. So why should Bashar Assad be any different? How has the Syrian president remained in office despite the West's ongoing economic and military onslaught?
Several reasons. Foremost among them is that the Syrian government has the support of the majority of Syrians, as illustrated by the 2014 elections. Despite ridiculous accusations of killing 250,000 of his own people, President Assad enjoys approval ratings that Western heads of state can only dream of. Even those Syrians opposed to Assad would rather have him in Damascus over the alternative (ISIS, Al-Nusra and other US-backed death squads).
The Syrian Arab Army must be credited, as well. Alongside Hezbollah and Iran, it's been the national army of Syria that's sacrificed over 80,000 troops combating terrorism and preventing the country from going the way of Libya.
The elephant in the room, though, has been Russian intervention. Diplomatic and military support from Moscow cannot be overstated, for it spells the difference between wars waged upon Iraq and Libya versus that of Syria. The Russian military has helped erase recent gains made by ISIS, effectively solidifying Bashar Assad’s present role for the foreseeable future and forced the United States to the negotiating table. Not surprisingly, we now hear a different tune coming out of Western capitals regarding the fate of Assad.
Together with the increasing threat of terror left unchecked and the valor of the national army, Moscow’s intervention in Syria has shifted Washington’s rhetoric from, “Assad has lost legitimacy” to “he can be part of the transitional process.” In other words, “things didn’t go as we had hoped so this is our pathetic attempt to save face.” And while it may seem odd for a citizen of the United States to take pleasure in its demise, as a citizen of humanity, the sight of a declining empire eating crow is a truly beautifulsituation™.