In his opinion, Russia did not appreciate the risks of the situation and left the "battlefield", in fact, recognize the limitations of his resources. This, according to political scientist, not a disaster, but a heavy blow to the prestige of the Kremlin.

To the question, what is the reason of the decision of the Russian leadership to withdraw troops from Syria, Konstantin von Eggert noted that there are several reasons. "The first reason is the economic situation. Financial-economic situation in Russia is not improving and makes us look for sources of savings and to concentrate on internal problems, stabilize the situation," he enumerates.

In this sense, according to Eggert, demonstration associated with Russia, the events of recent days.

"First, is the actual block of the Russian debt of European and American investment banks.

Secondly, it is a night meeting in the Kremlin, devoted to the problems of the economy. I have no cause to believe that the night people gathered to discuss the funding of the icebreaker fleet of Russia or the construction of the airport in Rostov-on-don, as we were informed through the media of the Kremlin sources", — the interlocutor claims. DELFI.

According to the observer, it is obvious that the meeting discussed the critical situation in the Russian economy, about what to do with the finances and state budget.

"And third, the head of the state Corporation "rostec" Sergey Chemezov confirmed that the state defense order will be reduced by 10%. Recent years, when we saw first an increase and then stabilization of the military budget of Russia, such was not" — he added.

Reason number two, the underestimation of the risks of the situation and attempt to avoid escalation. According to Eggert, when Russia began operation in Syria, it set itself three main tasks.

"Is the prevention of regime change, which, from the point of view of the Kremlin, the US had implemented in Syria by the hands of their allies. The creation of the agenda for Russian-American relations for the new administration after January 2017. And demonstration of domestic public opinion that Russia is still strong and without it is impossible to solve any global problem", — believes the expert.

However, Eggert notes that the risks of this impromptu were not calculated. With the beginning of Russian-Turkish conflict and the realization that radical and fundamental changes in the military-political situation in Syria could not be achieved without increasing Russia's military presence, it has led to a more sober analysis of the situation in the Kremlin.

"I think this is an attempt to avoid possible uncontrolled escalation, which could lead, albeit accidental clash between the Russian contingent and the Turkish armed forces," he says.

Another important element of the decision of the Russian leadership to withdraw troops from Syria Konstantin von Eggert calls the desire to divert attention from the Russian-Ukrainian conflict.

"Today it is clear that Russia's actions in Syria led to substantial changes in the positions of the US and the EU on Ukraine. This causes the Kremlin to concentrate on what for him is much more important. And Ukraine what is more important for Syria," — said the expert.

"The withdrawal of troops to the accompaniment of a ceasefire and talks on the settlement gives the possibility to introduce the Russian public opinion as a victory. Will have such a chance in the future, we don't know. Now this can be done without any risk to lose points in the eyes of Russian public opinion. In the year of the Duma elections to take risks, for example, major terrorist attacks against Russia or sudden losses among Russian servicemen in Syria, the Kremlin could not afford," concludes Eggert.

What is Russia's position after this step?

In this regard, the source noted that the middle East, beginning with the first deliveries of Soviet arms to the regime of Nasser in Egypt remained a relatively safe geopolitical game with the United States to the USSR, and then Russia.

"Perhaps for the first time, we see that Moscow is leaves the battlefield, thus actually recognizing their limited resources. In a sense, we can speak about the end of an era, Soviet and post-Soviet policy in the middle East," he said.

"In the region love and respect only force. The withdrawal from Syria at a time when not clear nor is the fate of the ceasefire nor the fate of Assad (which, apparently, the Kremlin's decision was a surprise) can be considered only as a recognition of its weakness and failure from the previous level of influence on the situation," says Eggert.

For a political scientist it is obvious that in the capitals of the Middle East will come to the conclusion that the Russian involvement in the middle East crisis and Russian interest in the outcome is not what was originally intended.

"I would say that this defeat, or at least the recognition of a lack of power from the Kremlin. It's not a disaster, but a heavy blow to the prestige of the Kremlin, maybe, since Maidan, and perhaps more difficult," — said the source.

The question of how events can develop further, because Syria still remain Russian forces, Eggert said, "We don't know yet, how will this withdrawal. We don't know if this is the stratagem that would cover the rotation of Russian forces or is it really reducing".

"It remains to be seen. It seems to me that such statements are not made to then to say: sorry, we're joking", — summed up the browser in an interview for DELFI.