According to comprehensive media reports, on October 15th, the new Syrian leader Ahmed al-Sharaa will meet with President Putin in Moscow, and will make a formal request, that is, ask Russia to extradite former President Bashar al-Assad who is in exile here and return to China for trial.
This demand, like a bright light, penetrated the ambiguity and silence usual in international politics, and instantly transformed the "red-field prisoner" hidden in the deep houses of Moscow into the most eye-catching and core code on the negotiating table.
For some time, Assad was one of the strongest regional allies of the Kremlin.
During that long Syrian civil war, Russia’s military power was a key pillar of its regime, with the Air Force of Khmeimim and the Navy of Tartus being the most intuitive symbols of the Syrian alliance.
Assad has also visited Moscow many times with high spirits as head of state.
However, since his regime was overthrown by the armed forces led by Shara at the end of last year, he and his family flew to Moscow in a hurry to seek asylum, and his status has changed from an "ally" to a "guest."
More cruelly, it has become part of Russia's geopolitical heritage.
Just two days before the "handover" incident, Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov made a rare public appearance to refute rumors that Assad was "poisoned and assassinated" in Moscow.
He claimed that Assad’s life was “all normal” and warned that he would pursue the responsibility of the rumor spreaders.
This anxious statement of "disinfection" may have seemed to be just to maintain superficial calm at the time, but now looking back, it looks like a harbinger of uneasiness before the storm.
It just exposes the sensitivity and vulnerability of Assad’s situation—he has turned from a political symbol that needs full support to a “negative asset” that needs to be clarified repeatedly and may even cause diplomatic trouble.
Ahmed Shara's trip was not just to ask for a down-and-down former president.
This is a well-planned diplomatic "conspiracy".
His demands accurately hit the contradictory points of Russia’s strategic interests.
On the one hand, Lavrov has made it clear that the Russian military will continue to maintain its presence in Syria, but the function may need to shift to humanitarian support.
This means that Russia's future influence in Syria must be re-anchored with the new regime led by Shara.
The future of the Port of Tartus and the Hermione base is no longer dependent on the old friendship with Assad, but on today’s negotiations with the government of Saleh.
So the demand for “to surrender Assad” became a perfect test stone.
For Sala, bringing the former “dictator” to justice at home is the best scenario for consolidating the legitimacy of the new regime.
Internationally, this is his declaration to show the world who is the real master of Syria.
For Putin, it was a bitter drink.
If he refuses, he will openly shelter a former leader who is characterized as a "sinner" by the new regime, which is equivalent to personally laying a huge thorn for his relationship with the new Salad government, and Russia's military presence in Syria will therefore lose its legal support and become precarious.
What if I agree?
That would mean that Russia would abandon its old Japanese allies, whom it had always supported, throwing a huge shadow of trust around the world, especially among those partners who still rely on Moscow’s support.
Assad can be handed over today, who will be handed over tomorrow?
Assad’s fate is thus placed at one end of the plain, and at the other end, is Russia’s future strategic interests in Syria and even the entire Middle East.
Assad's personal tragedy is the ultimate embodiment of the cold logic of international politics.
In the chess game of great powers, once a pawn loses its strategic position, its fate is no longer dominated by itself.
From the all-powerful head of state, to the exile who depends on others, to the core issue in diplomatic negotiations, his identity has fallen all the way.
His very existence, from a symbol of Russian-Syrian friendship, became the greatest barrier between two political entities in urgent need of cooperation.
In history, such figures are not alone.
Many of the strong men who have been agents of great powers are often struggling to escape the fate of being abandoned or traded after their use of exhausting value or changing momentum.Their personal honour and death ultimately serve the higher level of national interest calculation.
The salad's request just once again confirmed this ancient and cruel rule.
Today, the eyes of the whole world are focused on Putin's choice.
Is it adhering to an outdated allied morality, or a painful deal for the real strategic interests?
Assad’s residence in Moscow may still be safe and comfortable, but he has become a living monument commemorating the abnormality of power and the cold law of geopolitics that has no eternal friends, only eternal interests.
The diplomatic turmoil in Moscow, the final end of which is unknown.
But the only thing that can be assured is that no matter where Assad’s personal destiny goes, he has thoroughly completed the transition from a “chess player” to a “chess player.”
In a very ironic way, the story of Syria is opening a new chapter in which the new owner is defined and the old owner has become a condition for negotiations.