Iranian establishment split on Syria as fall of Assad leaves Tehran turning

As Bashar al-Assad’s rule collapsed in Syria, Iranian authorities watched in surprise and shock as the rebels advanced across the country in less than two weeks, taking cities one by one with little to no resistance.

An Iranian establishment source told Middle East Eye that Tehran did not expect the Syrian army to fold so quickly.

But when Hezbollah fighters left Syria to battle Israel in Lebanon, their 15 or more checkpoints on the borders with rebel-held territories were mostly not re-occupied by the army, he said.

“We couldn’t offer anything since the skies were in the hands of Israel,” another source close to the Tehran government told MEE, referring to frequent Israeli air raids in Syria, which have struck Iranian and Hezbollah targets over the past few months.

“Even the day before Assad’s fall, senior officials called for the protection of sacred sites, and efforts were made to send forces to safeguard them, but this too was unsuccessful.”

As the rebels approached Damascus on 7 December, Iranian state TV changed its tone. It began referring to the rebels as “armed groups”, whereas just a day before, they had been “terrorists”.

When Assad’s defences crumbled, Iranian media leaked a report stating that Tehran had received guarantees from Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the main rebel group responsible for planning and leading the offensive, that the sacred Shia shrines in Syria would not be harmed or destroyed.

The leak was aimed at alleviating the concerns and pressures from the religious class and the supporters of the establishment. The news was later confirmed by Iranian officials.

Anger with the establishment

Reactions in Iran were mixed.

One group of people, mostly religious and staunch supporters of the Islamic Republic, believe the establishment did not do enough – and had even been lured by the reformist government of President Masoud Pezeshkian into making a deal with the West and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan over Assad.

In their view, Assad played a major role in Iran’s strategy against extremist militant groups and Israel.

And despite efforts by the HTS, which was formerly linked to al-Qaeda, to project a more moderate image, the group remains an ideological threat.

Others, including a significant part of Iranian society, especially reformists, believe this is a forced but positive outcome for Iran, unravelling the “axis of resistance”, which suffered a heavy blow in Lebanon and has become a liability, as well as a source of sanctions and tensions with the US.

A senior reformist journalist, who wished to remain anonymous, told MEE: “Iran has paid a high price for its stupid and religious foreign policy.

“Our strategic depth is neither Syria nor Lebanon. The Islamic Republic prioritises the Islamic Ummah (nation) over national security and interests,” the journalist said.

“Based on our national interests, we should view countries like Israel as rivals, not enemies. That would solve many of our problems. That’s why what happened in Syria is beneficial, as it will force the Islamic Republic to reconsider its Ummah foreign policy to some extent.”

The view in Iran

There seem to be minor disagreements among Iranian decision-makers. While one group believes Tehran must continue contact with HTS and maintain maximum presence in Syria through diplomatic means, another group supports the creation of new proxy groups in the country.

In this regard, a former diplomat told MEE: “Now, Iran will advance its policies in Syria through several channels. On the one hand, it will wait to observe the behaviour of the future government. On the other, it will not remain idle and will continue its connections with all groups and potential capacities to promote the goals of the Islamic revolution.”

The second group contends that the new ruling entity in Syria is still Sunni extremist at heart, harbouring hatred for Iranians and Shia Muslims. They believe that Tehran must exert power and influence through proxy and popular groups critical of the new government.

In a public speech after the fall of Assad, Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said: “Time will show that none of them will achieve their goals, and without a doubt, the occupied territories of Syria will be liberated by the brave youth of Syria.

“The agents of arrogance think the Resistance Front has weakened following the fall of the Syrian government, which supported the resistance,” Khamenei continued. “However, they are gravely mistaken, as they fundamentally lack a proper understanding of resistance and the Resistance Front.”

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, meanwhile, spoke of likely opportunities arising from the discontent of some unnamed countries, likely the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, which are critical of political Islam and the Muslim Brotherhood.

“The current political situation in Syria leaves room for all possibilities, especially since some regional countries are very angry about what has happened. I won’t name them, but I suspect movements from the other side will begin, and we have seen examples of such situations in Libya, Sudan, and Lebanon,” Iran’s top diplomat said on state TV.

Asked about the supreme leader’s statement, an Iranian foreign policy analyst close to conservatives told MEE: “Building a Syrian resistance group with an anti-Israeli identity, especially when Syrian territory is officially occupied by Israel, is a major opportunity for the Islamic Republic and will be part of the plan to expand the resistance. In the potential quagmire of a Libya-like Syria, the resistance of Palestine and Lebanon will be rebuilt.”

The analyst pointed to the Syrian National Defence Forces (NDF), a paramilitary force established by Iranian General Qassem Soleimani in 2012, which initially numbered around 100,000 fighters.

However, the analyst said, the force was weakened and deprived of resources over the years, likely due to Assad’s efforts to limit direct Iranian influence, with the number of members reduced to just 11,000 over the years.

“However, the question now is: what will these men do?”

What’s next?

Analysts believe that with Iran’s axis collapsing, the West will soon target groups like the Houthis in Yemen and then Iran’s nuclear programme.

“The fall of Syria to rebel forces and armed groups opposed to Assad, backed by Turkey, means a logistical blockade for Hezbollah in Lebanon and resistance forces in Syria,” said an international relations professor in Tehran, who asked for anonymity.

“It is likely that Hezbollah forces alone will not be able to maintain political power in Lebanon, and developments in Syria will accelerate this process.

“It seems that as Iran loses its power network in Syria, it will soon also lose Lebanon,” the professor said, adding: “It appears the ultimate goal of this path is to attack Iran’s nuclear programme.”

The source emphasised, however, that any attack on Iran’s nuclear programme would provide an opportunity for Iran’s leader to change his fatwa against building nuclear weapons.

In such a scenario, the existential threat faced by Tehran could be leveraged as an argument in favour of removing the ban on developing nuclear weapons.