Comparing Military Losses: Russia in Syria vs. America in Afghanistan
The recent collapses of the Syrian and Afghan governments bring forth significant comparisons regarding the military equipment left behind by Russia and the United States. Russia has encountered notable losses in military capabilities as a result of the Syrian regime’s recent collapse, contrasting sharply with the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, where the majority of left-behind equipment lacks critical military effectiveness. Overall, Russia faced greater strategic setbacks compared to the United States during their chaotic withdrawals.
The recent collapses of the Syrian and Afghan governments yield remarkable similarities, particularly in the military resources left abandoned by both Russia and the United States. After the withdrawal of their respective forces, the amount of military equipment remaining in each country has prompted an examination into which superpower suffered greater losses. Reports indicate that Russian forces left behind substantial amounts of weaponry, including a significant portion of the Assad regime’s stockpile.
In Syria, the Assad regime, heavily armed with Soviet and Russian weaponry, suffered extensive losses throughout the civil war but retained a considerable arsenal until its recent downfall. Contrastingly, while the Taliban captured approximately $7 billion worth of U.S. military hardware, including aircraft and armored vehicles, much of the equipment left behind by the U.S. lacked significant military utility, aimed primarily at internal security operations. The nature of the armaments abandoned reveals a disparity; Russia lost more potent military capabilities that could bolster its ongoing regional and global ambitions.
Throughout the Syrian civil war, the Assad regime’s air and ground forces faced substantial attrition, predominantly facing the opposition and Islamic State threats, leading to significant equipment losses. As of last week, Israeli strikes targeted numerous Syrian military assets, annihilating quantities of the regime’s missile and combat capabilities. Most notably, the Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) forces have seized tanks, artillery, and vehicle stocks left behind. However, the extent of these boons remains undetermined owing to the Israeli military’s contention that many of the regime’s essential armaments have been obliterated.
The military support provided to Syria dates back to the Cold War, where the Soviet Union established a robust arms deal as a means to exert influence. Historical records reveal that from 1950 to 1991, Soviet weaponry constituted an overwhelming majority of Syria’s military imports. Following significant losses in prior conflicts, the Soviets replenished the Syrian arsenal with diverse air and ground systems in the latter part of the 20th century, maintaining the regime’s military infrastructure. In comparison, the United States equipped Afghan forces with technology tailored for counter-insurgency but largely inadequate for conventional warfare, which became evident post U.S. withdrawal in 2021. The Taliban’s ability to amass U.S. military equipment underscores a critical turning point, revealing the complexities related to retention versus transformation of military power in post-conflict scenarios.
In summation, the recent military losses in both Syria and Afghanistan illustrate the profound implications of superpower involvement and subsequent withdrawal. Russia’s loss of advanced military assets in Syria is markedly more severe than the United States’ withdrawal from Afghanistan, where most of the left-behind equipment held diminished strategic value. As Russia continues to engage in military operations in Ukraine, the loss of these resources may prove pivotal in future conflicts, contrasting with the Afghan scenario, where U.S. equipment lacks the same level of potential military effectiveness.
Original Source: foreignpolicy.com
