Over the past several weeks, the entire international community has turned their eyes to Syria and the Syrian refugee crisis in Europe. Over the past four years, the Syrian state has been engaged in a civil war that has killed nearly 250,000 people and displaced millions of families. The millions of refugees are fleeing anywhere nearby, though Hungary, Italy, and Turkey have seen a large influx of refugees. The current actors in Syria are the Syrian government and an Islamic extremist group known as the Islamic State of Levant, also known as IS, ISIS or ISIL. The presence of the Islamic State in the Middle East has turned the already war torn area into a zone of complete chaos. So, the questions arise: How will Europe respond to the insurgence of refugees? How will current Syrian President Bashar al-Assad continue to respond to the four year long war with Islamic State? And who will step in as a savior for the Middle East? Aside from the Syrian government and the Islamic State, the two major players in the game are the United States and Russia. It is well understood and widely accepted that these two nations have consistently had conflicting politics and opinions, conflicts which have been ever increasing over the past decade. With such a devastating humanitarian crisis developing in Syria and spreading into European states, it is difficult to step back and examine the motivations of these governments. Considering the current and residual international tensions between the United States and Russia, is it possible the Russian President Vladimir Putin, with the help of al-Assad, is entering a new Cold War by creating a new Russian led political powerhouse?

Russia’s invasion of Eastern Ukraine and Crimea in April 2014 extended Putin’s current international impressions. The international community does not take lightly to the breach of sovereignty, and Russia’s annexation of Crimea and current military presence in Eastern Ukraine is no exception. It has been noted that much of the fear over the Russian-Ukrainian conflict stems from the annexing of Crimea. The United Nations (UN) released that nearly 8,000 have died and almost 18,000 have been wounded since the eruption in 2014; this includes approximately 400 civilian deaths. The area has served as a station for the Russian Navy in the Black and Mediterranean Seas. Control and influence here allows Russia potential access to offshore oil gas reserves that could bolster the failing Russian ruble. Post the annexation of Crimea, Russia has suffered sanctions from the West and an increase of military opposition in Ukraine, though this does not seem to dissuade Russian forces. In February of 2015, a ceasefire was agreed upon in Belarus, Minsk, though the agreement has been broken on multiple occasions and another ceasefire orchestrated by France and Germany is on the verge of collapsing.

In order to retaliate against Western backlash, Putin has ordered for the presence of aircraft and ground units in Syria with permission from ally al-Assad. The New York Times defines Syria as a “golden opportunity” for Putin to discharge Western sanctions and establish himself and Russia as a hegemon, specifically over President Barack Obama and the United States. Putin’s insurgence of military personnel on Syrian soil as an ally of the Syrian government has been widely criticized by the international community due to corruption of the Syrian government and al-Assad. According to the Washington Post, the Syrian government has been responsible for more deaths than Islamic State cites Syrian analyst and author, Hassan Hassan, saying, “Most Syrians still consider Assad as the biggest criminal and their worst enemy.” His words echo that of Syrian civilian, Hassan Takuldin, who attacks al-Assad in the same Post article: “No human being should have to endure what Assad is putting us through [...] [Assad] is killing my neighbors. He is killing my friends. He is killing my family.” While Putin supports the efforts of al-Assad, most of the West concludes in order to end the four year long civil war, al-Assad will need to step down so a new official can be placed in office; the leading force in this discourse is the Obama administration.

However, Russia’s position on the Islamic State puts the United States and the Western opposition in an awkward struggle between the lesser of two evils; the Islamic State or Russia and Syria. The American War on Terror and active animosity and fear of Islamic State sets Putin and al-Assad up for immunity in their efforts to defeat the Islamic State’s rebels regardless of civilian casualties. Even though tension still lingers over Russian forces meddling in Ukrainian affairs, the Western World realized that they may need Putin’s aid in Syria. Putin’s alliance and support of Syria makes it nearly impossible for Washington to advocate for isolation of the Kremlin. By doing so, the US could be perceived as coming out in favor the Islamic State. Olga Orgutsova, Beloit College professor of Russian language and culture and immigrant from former Soviet Russia, stated in an interview that this is exactly Putin’s plan. Putin and al-Assad are using one another to avoid, as she coined, “a Gadaffi destiny.”

Orgutsova currently teaches a freshman seminar that specializes in this exact event. Her class, ‘From Da to Nyet: The New Cold War,’ explores the potential outcomes of the events arising. In an interview on the subject of Syria and Russia, Orgutsova answered the question, “What do you think Putin’s intentions are in Syria?” Her response was fairly simple: he is failing in Ukraine and needs a victory. Putin believed that Ukraine would be as easy to take as Crimea, The attacks on Eastern Ukraine came as a shock to the Ukrainian government. However, since the annexing of the Crimean Peninsula and Russian presence in the East, the Ukrainian military has increased their forces to combat the Russian strength. Due to Putin’s failure to gain control of Ukraine, he has set his sights elsewhere; the developing nations, specifically those in turmoil such as his allies in Syria.

Furthering her statement, Orgutsova says Putin aims to blame the United States for the current status of the Islamic State in Syria and its ever increasing strength and presence in the Middle East. The Putin administration’s belief is that military force and cooperation from the interior will defeat the expanding Islamic extremists, as opposed to exterior influences and forces such as the United States and the United Nations. Historically, Syria and Russia have frequently had amiable relations, and to date, Syria is Russia’s only ally in the Middle East. Economically, the Middle East is rich with oil deposits. Having just one ally in the Middle East is a benefit to the failing Russian economy. Politically, however, Putin continues to support the al-Assad regime and justifies his decisions. Putin steps in as the Syrian savior with the help of al-Assad by playing on the Western World’s fear of the Islamic State. Together, it is possible that these two leaders, both of whom have been on the outs internationally, are attempting to build a neo-Soviet bloc. This argument could be supported by Russia’s revived interest in Ukraine and Crimea.

Certainly Professor Orgutsova sees it playing out this way. In her interview she said, “ISIS is like a cancer, spreading into the bones of government. The idea that Putin can single handedly dispose of them is absurd.” Yet this is exactly what the Putin administration has set out to do. “His presence in Syria is a way to retrieve Russian power in the international community, set up a protective wall against political opposition for himself and al-Assad, and a spread of their political ideology.” By spreading his political regime, Putin demonizes the United States and much of the Western World, mirroring the Soviet Union during the first Cold War.

There is no denying that tensions between the East and West are running high. The influence of two regional hegemons, both with significant nuclear and international political power. Both states have permanent spots on the United Nations Security Council and veto power on UN resolutions. Just as we saw in the post-World War II era, Russia and the US have been using their veto power to spite one another and further their own interests in this increasingly severe conflict. With Russian influence of both Ukraine and Syria, the fear of a Russian-led powerhouse is certainly justifiable. The only question that remains is how the international community will respond to Putin’s possible revival of a painful and detrimental time in international history.