Do not be surprised to see three or four divisions of the Russian army in the Sunni triangle before year-end, with an announcement just prior to the US presidential election in November. Long rumored (or under negotiation), a Russian deployment of 40,000 soldiers was predicted on July 16 by the US intelligence site http://www.stratfor.com, and denied by the Russian Foreign Ministry on July 20. Nonetheless, the logic is compelling. Russian support for US occupation forces would make scorched earth of Senator John Kerry's attack on the Bush administration's foreign policy, namely its failure to form effective alliances. For Russian President Vladimir Putin, the chance to make scorched earth of Fallujah is even more tempting.
In exchange for a troop presence in Iraq, Russia would obtain a free hand in dealings with the countries of the former Soviet Union. It would gain leverage against a weakening Turkey in the Caucasus and Central Asia. And it would vastly enhance its leverage in negotiations over the placement of oil pipelines. Most important, perhaps, it would assert its old status as a global military power against the feckless Europeans. In short, the arrangement would benefit everyone, except of course the population of Fallujah.
I'm not sure about Russia's reasons for going to Fallujah but another ally in Iraq shouldn't be a bad thing. Especially seeing as how America probably isn't done with war in the middle-east quite yet.
We've yet to deal with Iran.
If or when that happens four divisions of U.S.-friendly Russian troops protecting our backs in Iraq won't be a bad thing.
Captain Ed has some insight into what we gain (and lose) if Russia comes to Iraq.
What does George Bush gain? Two big and obvious wins. First, Russia's addition of 40,000 troops to Fallujah will make them the second-largest contingent in Iraq, taking pressure off of the US to extend deployments and cycling Americans out of the zone with the most danger. Second, the alliance with Russia will, as Spengler notes, make hash out of the argument that Bush cannot attract allies. A third, more subtle win for Bush is the pacification of Fallujah, which will immeasureably strengthen the new Iraqi government, set Shi'ite minds at ease about the upcoming elections, and devastate the emotional momentum for Islamofascists worldwide.
What does Bush lose? Perhaps the introduction of Russian scorched-earth tactics, such as those used in Grozny, will backfire with a segment of the American public, but I tend to think that will only be limited to the rock-solid Kerry supporters. More troublesome will be the free hand in the former Soviet republics that the US would have to allow Putin to get him to sign off. It would mean a retreat, to an extent, on human-rights issues with the Russians. However, we are at war, and war means setting priorities -- and Bush has consistently made American security his overriding priority all along, and appropriately so.
I hope this happens.