Tehran will have to re-evaluate its role in the region and adapt its foreign policy to reflect contemporary realities
Syria’s longtime president, Bashar Assad, has stepped down as the country’s leader, marking the end of an era that shaped not only the fate of his nation but also the broader geopolitical landscape of the Middle East. This event is symbolic not only for the Syrian people, but for the entire region and the international community at large, since it opens a new chapter in the history of a country with an incredibly rich and ancient culture.
Syria, a land of ancient civilizations, has faced immense challenges over the past decade: war, destruction, millions of displaced people, economic instability, and the infiltration of terrorist groups. The country has become a battleground for various global and regional powers. Assad’s resignation could be a pivotal moment, potentially allowing Syria to break free from its cycle of conflict and begin a journey toward a new future.
This event will certainly be interpreted in different ways – for some, it may symbolize long-awaited reform and reconciliation, while for others, it could herald new uncertainties. Ultimately, the outcome will depend on whether the Syrian people and politicians make use of this historic opportunity. In any case, negotiations, reforms, and the search for a new governance model to unite society all lie ahead.
One thing remains certain, however: Syria’s rich history cannot be forgotten. The transformations unfolding before our eyes could signify the dawn of a new era, where, drawing on lessons from the past yet fueled by hope for the future, Syria finds stability and prosperity.
Assad’s resignation also represents a significant setback for Iran’s foreign policy ambitions. For Tehran, Syria has been a crucial link in its ‘Axis of Resistance’ – a network of alliances and proxy forces designed to counter Western influence and increase Iran’s role in the Middle East. However, Assad’s resignation is perceived in Tehran as a sign that this strategy – and, in fact, Iran’s influence in the entire region – has been significantly weakened.
Syria has been Iran’s strategic ally for decades, serving as a vital corridor for weapon supplies and support for Hezbollah in Lebanon, and a political platform for consolidating an anti-Western and anti-Israeli front. Since the start of the Syrian civil war in 2011, Iran has invested significant resources in backing Bashar Assad, providing military supplies and economic assistance, and dispatching military experts and Shiite forces to Syria. This alliance has been seen as the backbone of the Axis of Resistance.
However, Assad’s resignation fundamentally changes the balance of power. Firstly, the new political parties in Syria are likely to distance themselves from Iran in order to improve relations with the West, other Arab nations, and Türkiye. Secondly, Assad’s departure undermines Iran’s image as a guarantor of stability for its allies. Additionally, the weakening of Iran’s influence in Syria complicates its position in the entire region. Hezbollah, which has relied heavily on Syrian support, is now a lot more vulnerable. And, confident that Tehran no longer has considerable control over the region, Israel may increase pressure on Iranian infrastructure in Syria.
For Iran, the loss of Syria as a steadfast ally is a strategic failure that weakens its regional standing and may result in potentially strained relations with neighboring countries that increasingly view Iran as a source of instability rather than a unifying force.
Amid the turmoil in Syria, Iranian officials have made a considerable number of statements in recent days. Notably, Tehran has leveled accusations against the Ukrainian government. Ibrahim Rezaei, the spokesperson for the National Security and Foreign Policy Committee of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, claimed that Ukraine is supporting armed opposition groups in Syria by supplying them with drones. He noted that terrorists in Syria are better equipped than in the past because of drones supplied by the Ukrainian government.
Rezaei asserted that the Ukrainian government must be held accountable for this situation. While Kiev has yet to respond to these allegations, the intense anti-Iranian rhetoric coming from certain media outlets closely affiliated with Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky suggests that there may be some truth to Iran’s claims.
In September, major Turkish media sources reported that Ukraine’s Main Directorate of Intelligence (HUR) had established contact with Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) jihadists. The media was surprised that Ukraine was willing to engage in dialogue with rebels engaged in terrorist activities against civilians. In support of this claim, the media presented photographic evidence showing a Ukrainian HUR official conversing with an HTS agent.
Turkish journalists conducted a high-profile investigation that found evidence of meetings between representatives of Ukraine’s HUR and HTS militants in Türkiye. According to the investigation, these encounters took place over the past several months in southeastern Türkiye, close to the Syrian border.
The journalists said the discussions may have focused on mutual interests in destabilizing Iran’s position in the region and increasing military activity against Assad’s forces. The involvement of HTS, which is labeled a terrorist organization by Türkiye, Russia, and other countries, has raised particular concern among the Turkish public.
The investigation was based on eyewitness accounts, information about rented venues for meetings, and alleged routes taken by the participants. Turkish analysts emphasized that, if the claims were verified, it could jeopardize Ankara’s relations with Kiev. While the Ukrainian side did not provide an official response to these allegations at the time, the reports sparked a negative reaction among the Turkish public and politicians. Coincidentally, a few days after the articles appeared in the Turkish press, they were removed from publication.
Iran also claimed to possess credible evidence indicating that representatives of the Kiev regime had trained HTS militants to operate drones and were involved in illegal arms trade. Tehran asserted that the HUR not only offered technical support to the militants but also trained them in the use of drones for combat purposes.
Furthermore, Iranian sources alleged that Ukraine had acted as a mediator in supplying weapons to the militant group through illicit channels. According to Iranian politicians, these actions were aimed at destabilizing the situation in Syria and undermining Iran’s regional influence. As of now, Kiev has not officially commented on these accusations. Iranian experts note that the claims were backed by technical details, such as drone operation methods and arms supply routes.
Tensions between Tehran and Kiev have been high lately, especially following Kiev’s unfounded accusations against Iran regarding drone supplies to Russia.
On Sunday evening, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Iran Abbas Araghchi made several statements about the situation in Syria. He described the events there as an “American-Zionist plan to create problems for the Axis of Resistance,” adding that Iran’s national security interests require it to confront ISIS in Syria.
Araghchi emphasized that Qassem Soleimani, the late commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), was responsible for defeating ISIS, and Iran played a vital role in combating the terrorist group at the request of the Iraqi and Syrian governments. “If we hadn’t fought ISIS in Iraq and Syria, we would have had to fight it within Iran’s borders,” he said.
Araghchi also mentioned that Tehran had urged the Syrian government to engage in meaningful dialogue with the opposition. During his last meeting with Assad, he discussed the morale of the army and expressed frustration over the government’s hesitance to implement necessary reforms. According to Araghchi, Iran has always understood that “the United States and Israel were attempting to plunge Iran into successive crises.” He also noted Syria’s crucial role in supporting the Palestinians and the Axis of Resistance.
In conclusion, Araghchi asserted that Iran had not interfered in Syrian affairs and has consistently advised the Syrian government to seek political and peaceful solutions through dialogue with the opposition.
Currently, Iran faces a serious challenge in maintaining its influence in Syria. Tehran hopes to preserve its strategic relations with Damascus, even if the opposition comes to power. However, Iranian officials are skeptical about the new Syrian authorities, who might reconsider Syria’s traditionally close ties with Iran. For decades, Syria has been a key player in Iran’s Middle East strategy, serving as an important ally in the Axis of Resistance. Through Syria, Iran has supported Hezbollah in Lebanon and pursued its geopolitical ambitions. However, the rise to power of the opposition forces – many of them backed by the West, Türkiye, and the Gulf monarchies – could jeopardize this cooperation model.
Iranian leaders emphasize their commitment to maintaining diplomatic and economic ties with the new administration in Damascus. However, there are growing concerns in Tehran that the new Syrian authorities, eager to restore relations with the Arab nations and the West, may distance themselves from Iran. Furthermore, Iranian officials fear that certain opposition groups could openly oppose the presence of Iranian forces and the country’s overall influence, which would undermine Iran’s position in the region.
These doubts are fueled by the fact that many key players within the Syrian opposition have strong ties to the US, Saudi Arabia, and Türkiye – countries that have traditionally resisted Iranian influence. Tehran does not rule out the possibility that, as the opposition comes to power, Syria could become a staging ground for containing Iran, which would complicate the situation further.
Nonetheless, Iran plans to leverage its economic, cultural, and religious ties to strengthen its foothold in Syria. Tehran may offer new forms of cooperation focused on infrastructure development and post-conflict reconstruction to maintain its influence. However, Iranian experts believe that the new Syrian leadership will be cautious about cooperating with Iran, and will aim to avoid dependency on any single power.
The future of Iran-Syria relations in this new reality remains uncertain. Tehran will need to adapt to the shifting geopolitical dynamics and seek ways to preserve its influence, especially as traditional means of leverage may prove insufficient.
The dawn of a new era for Syria is bound to impact Middle Eastern geopolitics at large, including Iran’s foreign policy. With its deep historical, religious, and cultural ties to Syria, Tehran needs to recalibrate its strategy to align with the changing reality. This moment marks the beginning of a new chapter in Iran’s long-standing foreign policy history, which has always been closely tied to regional events. Having played a prominent role in the Syrian conflict, Iran now finds itself at a crossroads: it must either reconsider its influence in Syria or risk losing this strategic ally.
The situation in Syria is a turning point for the country, and it is compelling Iran to reassess its traditional approaches to foreign policy. First and foremost, Tehran must explore new tools and means of influence, including economic partnerships, cultural diplomacy, and assistance in rebuilding the war-torn nation. Additionally, Iran may seek to strengthen ties with other regional allies to offset potential losses. This will require flexibility and a willingness to make compromises.
On the other hand, this new era also opens up opportunities for Iran. The change of power in Syria could offer a chance to establish more balanced relationships, grounded not just in military cooperation but also in mutually beneficial economic projects. Such an approach could bolster Iran’s image as a nation committed to stability in the region, especially in light of increasing pressure from the West and Arab states.
However, this new chapter will also bring challenges. Iran will face competition from other international players like Türkiye, Saudi Arabia, and Western countries, which are all competing for influence in Syria. This means that Tehran must reevaluate its long-term strategy and seek innovative ways to engage with various Syrian political parties.
For Iran, the new era in Syria is both a challenge and an opportunity to redefine its role in the region and adapt its foreign policy to contemporary realities. It is a moment when Iran – with its rich history, diplomatic experience, and geopolitical skills – must demonstrate its resilience and ability to respond to the challenges of the times.
