The struggle in Syria between the rebels and the army of President Bashar Assad is not only for the future of Syria but also for the future of Iran in the Middle East. That much is evident from discourse among senior Iranian analysts over whether Iran’s status in the Syrian arena is under grave threat or, conversely, Iran has an opportunity to reinforce that strategic status.
According to one view, the latest developments seriously imperil Iran’s position in Syria. Deliberately or not, an intersection of interests has emerged in Syria among the United States, Israel, Turkey, and Russia, aimed at ousting the Iranian forces and their allies from the country, say the analysts. This convergence poses a real threat to Iran’s presence in the region. The analysts do not believe that this is a collusion between the United States under Biden’s leadership and Russia. Rather, they say, it involves separate agreements between Russia and Israel on the one hand, and Turkey and Russia on the other, which entail danger for Iran.
These agreements, it is claimed, stem from Turkey’s pressure on Russia after Turkey tried to arrange a meeting with Assad and he refused because of pressure from Iran. At the same time, Israel warns about attacking Syria and assassinating Assad if the Russians are unable to convince him to cut ties with Iran. According to these analysts, that was the aim of Israeli official Ron Dermer’s visit to Russia.
The Iranians view Russia’s airstrikes as reflective of a change in strategy. Whereas in the past these proved decisive in the struggle against the Syrian opposition, they are now weak if they occur at all. And so, the Kremlin, not in a position to contend with the situation alone, transfers the responsibility to the Syrian army.
The Iranians also believe that on Assad’s visit to Russia in recent days he was given the choice of completely severing ties with the Islamic Republic or being ousted from his post.
Additionally, Iranian analysts maintain that were Assad to be assassinated or deposed, it would not affect Russia’s influence on Damascus. If Moscow, they say, has indeed signed separate agreements behind the scenes with Turkey and Israel, it will eventually play a more significant role in Damascus without a strong Iranian presence.
On the issue of Turkey, the Iranians assess that even if it was behind the rebel attack, or even if it only consented to it, its goal is not only revenge on Assad. It also wants, they say, to prepare to act against the Kurdish independent administration in the near future. Therefore, the withdrawal of the Russian forces from Tel Rifaat [in northwestern Syria] is the prelude to that.
The analysts lament what they see as the Iranian regime’s greatest error, the perception of Israel and the US as posing the gravest danger to Iran – instead of understanding that it would come from a Turkey That is becoming imperialist.
What are the possible future scenarios for Iran, and how do they bode?
From this standpoint, possible future scenarios are quite gloomy for Iran.
AMONG THE possibilities these Iranian analysts point to are: The collapse of the Syrian regime as the opposition rapidly advances, the halting of the offensive as a result of international understandings that will entail a cutoff of Damascus-Tehran ties, or even a military coup that would change the governmental structure in Syria completely. Iran could find itself outside of the game, they warn– and suggest awaiting the developments.Conversely, some Iranian analysts also see opportunities. In their view, Israel and the US’s shared objective is to prevent Hezbollah from recovering. Therefore, they must eliminate its supply lines and support. In other words, a focus on the Syrian arena.
Israel, indeed, recently sent warnings to the Syrian government and to Assad himself that if Syria does not cut off supplies to Hezbollah, the regime will face a danger of collapse – prompting an uptick in visits to Syria by senior Iranian officials.
The US, Israel, and Turkey apparently assess that the Syrian government, the Syrian army, Iran, and Russia will not be able (as they were from 2011-2018) to wage a battle against the rebels and defeat them, especially when, unlike in the past, Iran is involved in a conflict with Israel, and Russia is immersed in a war in Ukraine.
Moreover, according to assessments, Hezbollah, which played a major role in protecting the regime, cannot do so at present, in light of the losses of fighters and weaponry it has suffered in the war with Israel, which is one of the reasons that the rebels attacked when they did.
Iranian analysts see a possibility that Israel, too, will choose to exploit opportunities in Syria and take aggressive action there, not just in support of the rebels as in the past.
The current crisis, despite its complexity, also harbors important opportunities for Tehran. The battle for Aleppo is a fight for the future of the resistance axis, analysts say. They argue that a victory in this arena will not only counteract the immediate threats but also give Iran an opportunity to reestablish its regional status.
The city of Aleppo, liberated in the past thanks to Iranian forces, is a flashpoint once again. Success in warding off the terrorists could lead to the liberation of Idlib and the destruction of the Syrian opposition after years of fighting, the analysts explain. Moreover, the current battles offer an opportunity to beef up the operational presence of the Iranian resistance forces, which can help expand Iran’s influence in the region and therefore should be sent to the region.
DESPITE CONSIDERABLE pressure on Assad to distance himself from Iran, some analysts believe that the latest events will only increase his dependence on the Islamic regime. If the Syrian regime finds itself more isolated, Iran will become its inevitable ally, they claim.
It is understood in Tehran that the battles in Syria are not just territorial; they are a test of Iran’s ability to preserve its regional status and its axis. The conclusion, then, is that Iran must fight to maintain its hold on Syria and shore up the resistance axis.
Iran is now indeed dispatching forces to Syria, according to the analysts, ostensibly to help the Syrian regime, but the real aim is to stymie regional attempts to sever the Tehran–Damascus axis. In Tehran’s view, it must strive to prevent the takeover of its strategic assets, in light of the weakness of the Syrian regime and the efforts to forge alliances,
Iranian forces, which are entering Syria under the regime’s auspices, constitute an important change on the northern front. Amid the disorder, these forces are likely to act against Israel and use Syrian territory to keep striving to rearm and rehabilitate Hezbollah.
The writer is vice president for strategy, security, and communications at the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs.
