In his final days in power, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad expressed concerns to Iranian officials that Turkey was supporting Sunni rebels seeking to overthrow him. Iranian backing for Assad has long served its geopolitical ambitions against U.S. and Israeli interests. The dynamics indicate a significant shift in the region following Assad’s departure, with potential implications for Iranian influence and regional alliances.
In the waning days of his presidency, Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad confided to Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, that Turkey was actively aiding Sunni rebel factions in efforts to oust him from power. Reports from Iranian officials to Reuters indicated that Assad’s discussions with Araghchi on December 2 reflected his dissatisfaction with Turkey’s actions. In response, Iran has historically supported Assad throughout the Syrian Civil War, viewing his potential removal as a significant setback for the Iran-led coalition that opposes U.S. and Israeli influence in the region.
As rebel forces, notably from Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), made substantial advances toward the capital, Iran reiterated its commitment to Assad during Araghchi’s subsequent meetings with Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan. Iranian officials characterized these discussions as strained, emphasizing Iran’s discontent with Turkey’s alignment with Western and Israeli interests against Iran’s regional allies. Fidan, however, countered by attributing the conflict to Assad’s failure to engage in meaningful peace negotiations, stating that his oppressive governance contributed significantly to the unrest.
Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei later remarked that the United States and Israel were behind the efforts to topple Assad, suggesting Turkish involvement without naming the country explicitly. Following Assad’s flight to Moscow and subsequent asylum, the strategic implications for Iran and Hezbollah were profound, as Assad’s government had curbed Iranian expansion across the region. In supporting Assad, Iran had aimed to maintain a critical land corridor that enables the transfer of resources and arms to Hezbollah in Lebanon, necessitating considerable financial and military investment over the course of the civil war.
The Syrian Civil War has been a deeply complex conflict since its inception in 2011, involving a myriad of factions including government forces, various rebel groups, and international powers. Iran has been a staunch ally of Assad, perceiving him as a key player in safeguarding its influence in the region, particularly against the backdrop of U.S. and Israeli interests. Turkey, a NATO member, has opposed Assad, supporting Sunni opposition groups in their quest for regime change. The war has drawn in numerous countries and has seen alliances shift significantly over time, making the situation in Syria not only a civil conflict but also a geopolitical battleground.
The discussions between Assad and Iranian officials underscore the deep-seated tensions in the region, highlighting Turkey’s significant role in supporting opposition forces against Assad. With the overthrow of Assad, Iran and Hezbollah face considerable strategic losses in their efforts to maintain regional influence. This scenario could lead to a realignment of alliances and power dynamics in the Middle East as countries reassess their positions in light of the evolving situation in Syria.
Original Source: www.voanews.com
