Syria crisis: Western meddling is Russia's main fear Syria crisis: Russia may never budge from its opposition to removing President Bashar al-Assad from power, analysts warn. Photograph: Majed Jaber/Reuters For 16 months Russia has blocked UN action on Syria, upheld arms sales with the regime, and lashed out at any suggestion that a solution to end the bloodshed might include the departure of Bashar al-Assad. The initial line was that Russia was acting on national interest, holding on to its last big ally in the Middle East, a significant weapons client and host to its only naval base outside the former Soviet Union. More than one year and an estimated 15,000 deaths later Russia's true calculations are starting to emerge. While the Kremlin remains largely silent about its intentions, closely connected analysts have begun to speak out. Their conclusions - that Russia objects to a western-led world order and refuses to endorse a solution that would further the international community's case for removing unpopular dictators - has overturned conventional thinking on Russia's approach. Ruslan Aliyev, a Middle east expert at the Moscow-based Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, said: "We tried to analyse: does Russia really support Syria because it needs the base at Tartus and because it's a valued arms customer? We came to the conclusion that no, that is not what's driving foreign policy. The consultancy found that about 5% of Russia's arms deliveries, which stood at £8.4bn last year, head for Syria. The base at Tartus, revealed in recent photographs and video published in the Russian media, is little more than a small, rusted, port mainly used for doing repairs. "In Russia, the elite relates very negatively to any attempt at western meddling," Aliyev said. There's a fear that if there's a new approach to the international system, where the west and UN can change the government of whatever countries they wish the whole world will turn to chaos. That the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, is facing increasing popular discontent with his growing authoritarianism has figured in the Kremlin's calculations, analysts say. The Kremlin has long been fearful of popular revolutions, blaming meddling by the US state department and intelligence agencies for everything, from the "colour revolutions" that gripped Georgia and Ukraine at the turn of the century, to the upheavals of the Arab spring. The Kremlin has levelled similar accusations against the tens of thousands of Muscovites who have taken to the streets since December to protest against Putin's return to the presidency, even though they remain a small fraction of the population. Sergei Lavrov, Russia's foreign minister, says his country's stance on Syria does not hinge on backing Assad but he refuses to endorse any plan calling for the Syrian leader to go. On Thursday, he dismissed reports that Russia was talking to the US about offering Assad asylum in Moscow. "Syrians themselves need to find common ground," he said. Next week Lavrov will meet Syrian opposition leaders, in Moscow, in the hope of starting "a Syrian dialogue between the government and all groups of the Syrian opposition," he said. The west may be coming to terms with the fact that Russia may never budge from its opposition to removing Assad from power. During a Twitter chat with his followers on Thursday, William Hague, the foreign secretary, wrote: "Our strong preference is to work with Russia & China but if Annan plan fails no option is ruled out." Dmitry Trenin, an analyst, recently wrote in an essay for the Carnegie centre, whose Moscow office he heads, that barring a huge shift in the conflict's internal dynamics, Russia was unlikely to change its position. He said: "To Moscow, Syria is not primarily about Middle Eastern geopolitics, cold war-era alliances, arms sales - or even special interests - Syria, much like Libya, Iraq or Yugoslavia previously, is primarily about the world order. It's about who decides. Not only do the Russians reject outside military intervention without a security council mandate; they reject the concept of regime change under foreign pressure. This support for non-intervention is unsurprising given that all regimes, excepting established democracies, could be theoretically considered as lacking legitimacy. Analysts close to the Kremlin point to other concerns, such as the estimated 100,000 Russian citizens inside Syria, a potential refugee crisis that could reach Russia's southern regions and neighbours, and the fear of seeing a failed state close to its borders. Aliyev said: "We have the example of Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. The consequences from bringing democracy via a military path will bring results worse than what is happening now.