The Russian lease on the Crimean port of Sevastopol runs out in 2017 and can’t be extended without Ukraine’s accord. Sevastopol is Russia’s largest naval base and its lifeline to maintaining a blue-water navy via the Black Sea, the Dardanelles and the Mediterranean. Losing the base would leave Russia a virtually landlocked country. Its enclave of Kaliningrad can never be developed into a major naval asset, while the Siberian coast in the far east is hard to resupply.
By 2017, Ukraine may well be a member of both the European Union and NATO -- and it would be odd indeed for a NATO member to host Russia’s biggest military bases.
So Moscow has been seeking an alternative to Sevastopol for the last decade. Russian strategists believe they’ve found it on Syria’s Mediterranean coast.
I thought Taheri's piece was interesting since it would imply that Russia is giving up on retaining Sevastopol. But I didn't think they were. So I found my old post. The lease is indeed good until 2042 (I figured a minute of Googling was worth the effort). Worse, a NATO country, by NATO rules, can't host a base of a non-NATO country. So Russia managed to keep Ukraine out of NATO with some real nuanced foreign policy.
I think the simplest explanation for Russia's behavior regarding Syria may be the most accurate.
