In other words, the awareness of each other's nuclear capability acted as deterrent to outright hostilities, while each nation's depth of commitment to its political and social ideology meant that withdrawal or capitulation was not an option... well, not for many decades!
Is Syria the first proxy war of Cold War II? No, not really.
Nuclear weapons remain a potent deterrent, now and prior to 1991. Russia has replaced the USSR as one of the two powers, with greater strength than the USSR in some ways (no longer socialist, religiously tolerant), but less in others (equally or more authoritarian leader, loss of Soviet bloc nations in eastern Europe and central Asia). Russia certainly has resolute leadership. A cold war requires two antipodal powers though.
The USA's presidential leadership under the Obama administration is weaker than that of any president during the Cold War years. Putin is described in many unflattering ways--as a thug and a former KGB agent--but never as effete. Russia's Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov is intelligent and perceptive. He is a formidable counterpart to our recent secretaries of state, John Kerry and Hillary Clinton.
The Syrian Civil War and containment of ISIS cannot be a US versus Russia proxy war if US foreign policy is indecisive, slow-moving, and undermined by the belief that Russia's need to retain its sphere of influence (even though primarily for its own domestic security) is "on the wrong side of history" thus should be ignored.
| Artistic rendering of Marie Harf |