Bashar Assad’s Syrian regime has deliberately maintained distance from escalating conflicts involving Hamas and Hezbollah amid intensified Israeli airstrikes, reflecting both its weakened military capability and the need to preserve his government amid regional tensions. Analysts suggest this cautious approach questions Assad’s utility to Iran while emphasizing his priority of regime survival over active regional engagement.
Over the past year, Syrian President Bashar Assad has navigated the escalating tensions between Israel and Iran with a careful avoidance of direct engagement in conflicts regarding Gaza and Lebanon. Despite his informal ties with Hamas and Hezbollah and claims of support against Israeli aggression, Assad’s regime is acutely aware that involvement in such conflicts could provoke severe retaliation from Israel, endangering stability within his already beleaguered country. The Syrian regime has been weakened by 13 years of civil strife, international isolation, and economic difficulties, leading many analysts to characterize Assad’s reluctance to act as a reflection of his vulnerability and decreased significance within the Iranian-led Axis of Resistance—a coalition of Iran-backed proxies including Hamas and Hezbollah. Since Iran intervened to bolster Assad in 2011, Syria has predominantly served as a conduit for Iranian military support to Hezbollah, but this relationship is now strained as Assad struggles to maintain control amid increasing Israeli airstrikes targeting Iranian assets within Syria. Experts such as Aron Lund observe that Israel’s air campaign has intensified significantly since 2023, further limiting Assad’s military response options due to the risk of provoking a catastrophic escalation. Political economist Karam Shaar suggests that Assad’s inaction can also be seen as recognition that Israel could attempt to dismantle his regime if provoked. This perspective is bolstered by the reality that the Syrian military, despite previous support from Russia and Iran, remains considerably weakened after years of conflict. According to Randa Slim, the Syrian Arab Army cannot endure another major military confrontation, especially given the geopolitical distractions faced by both its allies. Moreover, Assad’s relationship with Hamas has soured since 2011 due to Hamas’s support for the uprising against his rule, complicating Syria’s potential contributions to Gaza’s situation. The Syrian regime’s grasp on Lebanese affairs has similarly dwindled post-2011, with Hezbollah now significantly more dominant in the region than the Syrian forces were in the past. The consensus among experts highlights Assad’s foremost priority—his own survival—while acknowledging his precarious position as a diminished player within the evolving dynamics of regional conflicts. Although his rule has benefitted from the backing of Iranian and Hezbollah forces, the current realities suggest a cautious approach to avoid deeper entanglement in conflicts that could threaten his regime’s existence. Despite being under pressure, Assad may also be calculating that Iran’s influence could weaken as the situation escalates further, presenting him with a unique opportunity to distance himself from Tehran’s orbit and rejuvenate ties with Arab nations. Evidence of this cautious calculus exists in his maintenance of nominal support for Hezbollah, allowing for tactical cooperation while avoiding provocative actions that might attract Israeli strikes. In summary, Assad’s navigational strategy through the current escalation between Israel and Iran reflects a precarious balancing act, where he must contend with significant external pressures while striving to maintain internal stability. The complex interplay of weakness, external alliances, and regional dynamics dictates his approach, revealing a regime that, while diminished, remains deeply intertwined with the geopolitics of the region.
The Assad regime in Syria has been under immense pressure due to a decade-long civil war, with ongoing international sanctions and the complicated dynamics of regional influence led by Iran. Since the outbreak of the Syrian uprising in 2011, Assad has leaned heavily on Iranian support to maintain his grip on power, leading to a significant transformation of Syria into an arena of proxy alliances, particularly involving Iran, Hezbollah, and other regional actors. However, as tensions escalate between Israel and Iran, the Assad regime must navigate these waters with caution, as any military engagement could provoke Israeli retaliation, with uncertain implications for Assad’s already precarious position.
In conclusion, the Assad regime’s strategy of avoiding direct conflict in the face of rising Israeli-Iranian tensions underscores its fragility and strategic cautiousness. The regime prioritizes its survival over active participation or support in resistance efforts led by Iran and its proxies, maintaining a delicate balance that reflects both internal vulnerabilities and the complex geopolitical landscape of the region. As the situation evolves, Assad’s actions will continue to be observed for their implications on regional stability and his own capacity to retain power amidst increasing challenges.
Original Source: www.arabnews.com
