PHOTO: President Assad and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, February 2012

Rumors of Moscow’s expanding military involvement in Syria spread through media on Wednesday, with fragments of evidence woven by some outlets into shock headlines such as “Russia Puts Boots on the Ground in Syria”.

As we noted on Sunday, the story began three weeks ago when opposition media claimed that new Russian technical crews were been deployed in Latakia Province on the Mediterranean. The plausible explanation for this was that Russia was expanding one of its naval bases in the province, or even establishing a new one.

See Syria Feature: Assad’s Media Claim Russian Military Personnel Inside Syria — But Is The Story True?

However, activists speculated that the Russians were moving to support of regime ground operations, amid a rebel advance in neighboring Hama Province. The pro-regime Al-Watan News added to the chatter with the notes that, in addition to the naval base at Jableh in Latakia, “Many military advisors have reached Damascus” and “Russia has begun to supply Damascus, for the first time, with satellite imagery”.

The Oryx Blog, an observer of weapons and manpower, then offered the first substance to back up the rumors. It spotted — in video and audio on Syrian State media — an image of an advanced BTR-82A infantry fighting vehicle in Latakia and snippets of Russian-language exchanges. A website on naval activities posted pictures of a Russian warship, passing through Turkey’s Straits of the Dardanelles, with what appeared to be military trucks and four BTR-82As under tarpaulins.

It was only on Monday that the story took off when Israel’s YNet proclaimed, “Russian Jets in Syrian Skies“. There was no additional evidence in the article, but it was the size of the claims that mattered:

Russian fighter pilots are expected to begin arriving in Syria in the coming days, and will fly their Russian air force fighter jets and attack helicopters against ISIS and rebel-aligned targets within the failing state….

In the coming weeks thousands of Russian military personnel are set to touch down in Syria, including advisors, instructors, logistics personnel, technical personnel, members of the aerial protection division, and the pilots who will operate the aircraft.

Without considering the exaggerations, mainstream media latched onto the story. By Monday night, The Daily Beast had turned it into insinuations of Russia’s direct involvement in ground battles as well as airstrikes — again, with no additional information except the note on the Russian warship travelling through Turkish waters.

The Washington Post also had nothing new, but it based “Russia’s Involvement in Syria might be Ramping Up” on small, shadowy images which were “possibly a SU-34 fighter jet and a Russian drone”. The support for this claim was an article in Iran’s Fars News, the outlet of the Revolutionary Guards and notorious for its false stories.

The Times of London tries to jump on the bandwagon, “Kremlin Sends Men and Arms to Prop Up Dying Assad Regime“. So the London’s Daily Telegraph has to follow, “Russian Troops ‘Fighting Alongside Assad’s Army Against Syrian Rebels’“. Perhaps needless to say, it churns the same

(A welcome exception to the media wave was Jonathan Marcus of the BBC, who assessed the established evidence rather than the speculation to ask, “How Far is Russia Prepared to Bolster Assad?“)

On Tuesday, the Russian Defense Ministry knocked back some of the claims: “There has been no redeployment of Russian combat aircraft to the Syrian Arab Republic. The Russian Air Force is at its permanent bases and carrying out normal troop training and combat duty.”

The next day, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said bluntly, “One shouldn’t believe these reports.”

To recap, the sum total of reliable evidence for Russia’s “boots on the ground” and warplanes in the skies is:

1. At least one advanced infantry fighting vehicle in Latakia Province in western Syria;
2. Seconds of a Russian-language conversation, possibly from advisors giving instructions to the crew of that infantry fighting vehicle.
3. Possible images of military trucks and more infantry fighting vehicles.

So Russia might be 1) stepping up its long-time supply of military equipment into Syria; 2) providing advisors on the operation of that equipment; 3) planning to expand an existing naval base or build a new one.

There is no support for the claim of Russian aerial intervention. Indeed, the biggest claim of that intervention — the entry of six MiG-31 jet fighters to support the Assad regime — proved not to be true last month. (Interestingly, none of this week’s mainstream reports noted the rise and fall of that rumor, as they put out new ones.)

There is no support for Russian troops on the ground. Instead, the forces propping up the Syrian military — as has been the case since late 2012 — have come from Iran, Lebanon’s Hezbollah, and militias from countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan.

Missing the Bigger Story

So is there no truth to the claim that Russia is redoubling its support for President Assad?

Far from it, Moscow has given the clearest signals this week of that support. However, they came in diplomatic, rather than military, activity.

On Monday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told an audience at a Moscow university:

“[Western politicians] are trying like previously for eliminating Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi to give the top priority on Syria to the resignation of Bashar Assad saying he is illegitimate. But he is very legitimate….

The demand for Assad’s resignation as a precondition for the struggle against terrorism is completely unrealistic and counterproductive.

This demand is currently present in the position of a whole range of our partners. We will be able to work efficiently should this demand be lifted.

Moscow’s support for Assad’s stay in power is far from new, of course, but the timing of Lavrov’s declaration is important.

Last month, Saudi Arabia sank a Russian-Iranian initiative, pursued since late June, which would keep Assad as President while high-level talks were held about a transitional government. The Saudi Foreign Minister — at a joint press conference in Moscow with Lavrov — told journalists that Assad must depart before talks could develop. An angry Lavrov muttered “Idiots” as he realized that Moscow’s plans were now in disarray.

The Russians were faced with a difficult political choice. Did they give way to the demand for Assad’s departure, hoping to keep “reliable” Syrian officials in the transitional government? Or did they renew their commitment to the Syrian President, despite his increasingly-difficult military and political situation?

The dilemma has been compounded this week by UN envoy Staffan de Mistura, as he presented his revised plan for a resolution of the conflict. Significantly, de Mistura stepped back from his declaration that “Assad must be part of the political situation”. In his new proposal, the President will become a figurehead, and 120 leading members of the regime — unnamed in the document — will be barred from office.

At least in public, Lavrov and the Russians gave their response. For now, Assad stays.

Privately, Moscow may be more flexible in its position. But then that is speculation — the same type of speculation that has been the basis for this week’s dramatic military news which turned out to be not-so-dramatic.