[War & Business] The Real Motives Behind Putin, the Architect of the Ukraine War, Calling for a Middle East Ceasefire

Putin Urges Ceasefire in the Middle East
Russia Gains from Reduced Western Support for Ukraine,
But Risks Losing Oil Interests if Israel-Hamas War Escalates

"We urge the international community to make joint efforts aimed at easing the conflict and achieving a ceasefire between Palestine and Israel, and finding a political solution to the dispute. The deaths of children in the Gaza Strip are a terrible tragedy."

On the 21st of last month (local time), Vladimir Putin, President of Russia, delivered a speech at the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) virtual meeting held in Johannesburg, South Africa.
[Image source=Reuters·Yonhap News]

Although this statement appears to be from a UN announcement, it was actually made by Russian President Vladimir Putin, who is often called the instigator of the Russia-Ukraine war. He recently made these remarks during an online video conference of BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa), a group of emerging economies, emphasizing the urgent need for a ceasefire between Israel and the Palestinian armed group Hamas.

While the United States, the West, and the international community strongly criticize President Putin’s duplicity, he remains unfazed and continues to call for peace in the Middle East, positioning Russia as a mediator. This stance is difficult to understand when considering Russia’s current situation, as it is widely regarded as the biggest beneficiary of the ongoing war between Israel and Hamas.

Recently, the US ABC network reported, citing senior Ukrainian military officials, that since the outbreak of hostilities between Israel and Hamas in October, US artillery support to Ukraine has decreased by about 30%. The Ukrainian government is also reportedly fearful that its war will be forgotten, as international attention and support have noticeably waned. Conversely, the Russian military has literally been revived as Ukrainian counterattacks have stalled.

Ultimately, from Russia’s perspective, the longer the Middle East war continues, the better it seems. However, the reality is more complicated. If the conflict between Israel and Hamas prolongs or escalates, Russia’s core interests in the Middle East could be seriously jeopardized.

Since 2014, Russia has been deeply involved in the Syrian civil war and played a decisive role in protecting the Assad dictatorship. The Russian military has been blocking advances by Syrian rebel groups, mainly composed of pro-Iranian armed factions.

Behind Russia’s moves lies the issue of international oil prices. While Russia supports pro-Iranian armed groups in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia, Iran’s adversary, maintains a close relationship with Russia. Despite various pressures from the US and the West following the Russia-Ukraine war, Saudi Arabia has been reluctant to join sanctions against Russia or expel Russia from OPEC+, based on this tacit cooperation.

In this context, if the fighting between Israel and Hamas escalates into a full-scale war between Iran and Israel or even triggers a ‘Fifth Middle East War,’ Russia’s interests in the region would face a major threat. Pro-Iranian Syrian rebel groups could regroup and threaten the Assad regime again, but Russia would no longer have the capacity to deploy troops. Should the Assad regime collapse, the honeymoon relationship between Saudi Arabia and Russia would fracture, and oil?essential for conducting war?would be severely impacted.

Therefore, President Putin’s calls for Middle East peace are not merely for image cleansing. They reveal that international diplomacy operates within far more complex internal circumstances and power dynamics than the surface diplomatic relations suggest.

Countries that fail to understand these intricate mechanisms of international diplomacy will inevitably find survival increasingly difficult. Our government, which is currently focused on establishing a new stature on the international stage, is hoped to pursue a more sophisticated diplomatic strategy than it does now.