I imagine there might have been a few expletives uttered in Washington’s corridors of power at television pictures showing Syria’s President Bashar al – Assad’s visit to Moscow.

It’s unlikely of course that the Americans would have been entirely unaware of Mr Assad’s journey, albeit reportedly aboard a Russian military aircraft and unannounced until he returned to Damascus.

American ire I suspect probably derives more from the diplomatic public relations challenge thrown down by the handshakes between Mr Assad and Russian President Vladimir Putin that were shown across world news networks.

Doubtless the White House is left wondering how best to respond and counter any damaging speculation as to what all this means in terms of Russia – Syria relations?

And speaking of those relations, these are changed days indeed. It was only a few years ago during the winter of 2012 that Mr Putin dismissed the Syrian leader’s plight with the observation that Mr Assad had spent more time courting leaders in European capitals than he ever had in Moscow.

The two it’s reported do not exactly warm to each other. Yet, despite this, and barely three years on from Mr Putin’s acid remarks, both are operating in an alliance that each hopes will provide them with something of a political get-out-of-jail card.

In the case of Mr Assad it’s his very survival given the myriad enemies at the gates of Damascus. There is now no doubt that Russia’s recent military intervention has given him some respite following times when Mr Assad’s rule looked vulnerable indeed.

From Vladimir Putin’s perspective on the other hand, Moscow’s intervention in Syria’s war has once again sent out the message that the Russian president is a leader to be reckoned with.

Only yesterday Mr Putin’s approval rating is said – albeit by a state pollster – to have hit a record high of almost 90 percent, primarily as a result of his decision to launch air strikes in Syria against Islamist militants.

The pollster, VTsIOM, said Putin's rating had reached 89.9 percent in October, up from a previous high of 89.1 percent in June. Back in January 2012 around the time Mr Putin was bad mouthing President Assad, the same pollster had put this rating at 58.8 percent.

Even Russia’s other main pollster, the Levada Centre, which is not linked to the Kremlin, has also registered strong public approval for Mr Putin, saying he scored a rating of 83 percent in August this year.

The bottom line here is that as a result of his Syrian foray Mr Putin is ensuring that Moscow will be seen as a power broker with whom the competing factions within Syria and across the region will have to contend.

Russia’s intervention might have bought Mr Assad some respite and time but the Kremlin is also looking to the long game and knows that Mr Assad’s days as ruler of anything resembling a united Syria are most likely numbered.

Mr Putin made this much clear too back in 2012 noting that “we aren’t concerned about Assad’s fate, we understand that the same family has been in power for 40 years and changes are obviously needed.”

Clearly from Moscow’s perspective Mr Assad is no sacred cow, Russia’s priority being to ensure that Syria does not go the way of Libya descending into factional anarchy.

So much then for what both men appear at face value to have gained from their meeting in Moscow. But Mr Assad’s visit and his first trip outside Syria in four years is significant for other reasons too.

It acts as a clear indication of how much the pressure has eased a little on his regime. Not that long ago Mr Assad’s departure from the country for even the briefest of periods would have been unthinkable and most likely have prompted a coup or drastic military setback.

It also sends a clear message to other allies. It’s worth remembering that Iran too has long backed Mr Assad’s regime. But then Tehran unlike Moscow is not a major international player with a seat on the UN Security Council.

The significance of the Moscow meeting can also be gauged by nature of the reactions it generated, making the future implications of the meeting as important as the fact that it happened at all.

For a start key regional leaders, Turkey and Saudi Arabia didn’t lose a minute in contacting Mr Putin shortly after his Syrian ally’s visit.

Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu later said a political settlement could begin if Mr Assad "stayed in Moscow," but nevertheless pressed a need to start a transition period, while Mr Putin reportedly briefed Saudi King Salman on the results of the meeting.

Yesterday ahead of a meeting with his US, Russian and Turkish counterparts, Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir, said Russia’s action “will trigger emotions in the Muslim world that will cause an increase in fighters to go to Syria.”

Given Riyadh’s own role in the Syrian conflict such comments were probably given short thrift by diplomats in Moscow.

All of which brings us back to Washington and what President Barack Obama’s team made of the meeting in Moscow. In a nutshell the “red carpet welcome” as a White House spokesman called it, went down like a lead balloon. Washington reminded the world that it was Mr Assad who has used chemical weapons against his own people and Russia’s actions were at odds with their stated goals of political transition in Syria.

If activities on the Syrian battlefield have reached a new high in recent weeks then the diplomatic process has hit another low. All this does not augur well and most likely will hasten another brutal winter of war.