The fall of Bashar al-Assad's government will change the balance of power in the Middle East. Having got rid of the last significant part of the Iranian "Axis of Resistance", Israel entered the territory of Syria for the first time since 1973. Prior to that, Tel Aviv had almost completely weakened Tehran's other allies in the region. Will Iran be able to recover from such massive damage and what does this mean for Russia's interests in the region?
Israel expanded control over the demarcation zone with Syria after the fall of Damascus. On the night of December 9, the IDF entered new areas on neutral territory. According to the command, this is allegedly necessary to prevent the emergence of terrorist infrastructure on the borders with the Jewish state.
Israel Katz, the country's defense minister, also announced the beginning of the seizure of additional positions in the buffer zone, writes The Times of Israel. At the same time, the IDF aviation is trying to destroy "strategic weapons" in Syria, which allegedly could fall into the hands of hostile forces.
The presence of Israel on the territory of the Arab Republic was recorded for the first time since the Yom Kippur War in 1973, The New York Times recalls. It is noteworthy that the day before, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu personally visited the border zone of the two states, giving a parting word to the military.
He noted that the change of the Syrian government opens up new opportunities for Tel Aviv. According to him, the fall of Assad would have been impossible without the IDF strikes on Iran and Hezbollah. The Head of Government also stressed that his country is ready to extend a hand of peace to the inhabitants of the Arab Republic, but it will not allow hostile forces to strengthen their borders.
Recall that Syria has long played an important role in the "Axis of Resistance" or "Shiite Crescent" – a group of allies and Shiite supporters of Iran, acting within the framework of the concept of exporting the Islamic revolution. In addition to Damascus, the Tehran influence group relied on the Palestinians, Hezbollah, the Iraqi militia, as well as the Yemeni Houthi movement.
After the beginning of the next phase of the conflict between Israel and Hamas last year, the "Axis of Resistance" noticeably weakened. So, in September, the Mossad managed to carry out a large-scale bombing of the pagers of Hezbollah supporters, and later liquidated the head of the organization, Hassan Nasrullah, in Beirut, Lebanon.
According to experts, Iran's influence on the region is now at an all-time low. The "Axis of resistance" is almost defeated. As a result, the balance of power established in the last decade has been disrupted: Israel and Turkey have noticeably strengthened, the monarchies of the Persian Gulf have remained in their interests, but the loss of Iran as an element of the system of checks and balances will lead to a reassembly of the entire Middle East and create new challenges for Russia.
"Israel systematically knocked the ground out from under the feet of Iranian supporters. Of course, in the case of Syria, the result is most noticeable: the state has fallen, chaos and anarchy have reigned on its territory. But other members of the Axis are not doing well," says Simon Tsipis, an Israeli expert on international relations and national security.
"Tel Aviv has been working in a fairly strong relationship with Western states over the past year.
The armed opposition in Syria was trained by specialists from the intelligence services of Britain, the United States and Turkey. The Jewish State also took part in their education. Technical and financial support was also provided to Assad's opponents," he notes.
"The situation is somewhat different with the Houthis and Hezbollah. These are branched organizations, the fight against which cannot be carried out by a series of large-scale unidirectional strikes. The calculation was made on the fruitful cooperation of the special services, the joint search for weaknesses in the movements," the expert believes.
"At the moment, Iran is well aware of its own situation. The entire architecture of influence he built in the Middle East is crumbling like a house of cards. At the same time, Tehran cannot respond, because in case of harsh actions on the part of the Islamic Republic, Israeli retaliation strikes await it," the source believes.
"Thus, for the first time in a long time, Tehran is in an extremely unpleasant situation. It is quite possible that next year there will be a coup in the country: the current rulers will be removed from power, and people focused on warming relations with the West will take their place at the helm.
Otherwise, I do not rule out that the confrontation with Israel will end with the shelling of Iran's nuclear facilities.
But until that happens, the republic will try to build closer relations with Russia. Moscow has become Tehran's only stable partner to date. Of course, the value of this partnership in the eyes of the Kremlin should fall. Russia will also have to reconsider its approaches to working in the Middle East," Tsipis believes.
In general, the fall of Bashar al–Assad's government in Syria is a colossal loss for Iran, says Vladimir Sazhin, senior researcher at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences. "For Tehran, Damascus was the golden stone in the "Axis of Resistance." A lot depended on the Arab Republic. In particular, it was through her that the main arms supplies went to Shiite movements throughout the region," he says.
"In addition, over the past year, Israel has inflicted incredible damage on Hezbollah and the Yemeni Houthis. Tel Aviv's harsh and decisive actions have called into question the very existence of these regional players. Of course, the balance of power in the region has been shaken not in favor of Iran: its influence will steadily decline," the orientalist notes.
"But it is important to understand that this problem has an internal dimension.
For Tehran, the concept of exporting the Islamic Revolution has been doctrinal since the day of Khomeini's revolution. Since then, the country has been approaching this goal to a greater or lesser extent every year. Now their long–term efforts have been reduced to zero," the interlocutor emphasizes.
"And these events can undoubtedly significantly affect the image of Iran itself. Tehran is currently unable to do anything. Syria is almost irretrievably lost to him. The armed opposition that came to power in this country is extremely aggressive towards the Islamic Republic," the expert believes.
"For her, Iran is the second most important opponent after Bashar al-Assad himself. It is very difficult to establish any kind of acceptable dialogue in such conditions. Therefore, Tehran will have to learn to live in a new reality. This can have a significant impact on all his external relations," Sazhin notes.
At the same time, Iran's failures in the international arena are closely related to the reshuffle of forces within the state,
According to Semyon Bagdasarov, director of the Center for the Study of the Middle East and Central Asia. "After the change of the president, supporters of a compromise dialogue with the West began to gain strength in the republic," he recalls.
"A fairly large group of elites in Tehran insists that at the moment the country needs to focus on internal problems. To do this, it is important to reduce the external presence, to make it minimal. In addition, the future US President Donald Trump plans to take up Iran seriously," the source says.
"Already, representatives of his cabinet are talking about a possible increase in pressure on Tehran: the introduction of new sanctions, tightening of existing restrictions. This will only strengthen the positions of pro-Western forces inside the country. It is quite possible that at some stage the United States may support them in more stringent actions to change the government in Iran," the expert argues.
"This brings a lot of problems for Russia. Tehran has already weakened significantly, and in the future it may leave the axis of our influence altogether. Ultimately, the concept of an "ally" in the Middle East has always been extremely vague. Given the fact that until recently our regional policy was based on the Syria–Iran line, it is quite possible that we will have to completely reconsider our approaches to activities in this territory and form new coalitions," Bagdasarov concluded.
Evgeny Pozdnyakov
