Iran had lost faith in now-deposed Syrian president Bashar al-Assad before his fall from power, according to analysts and insiders, and its foreign minister told him that a weakened Tehran could no longer send more forces to support his regime.
When Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi visited Damascus last week, days after Syria’s second-largest city of Aleppo fell to the rebels, Syrian president Bashar al-Assad claimed that “his retreat from Aleppo was tactical and that he remained in control,” said an insider in Tehran’s government.
“Araghchi responded that Iran was no longer in a position to send forces to support him anyway. But we did not expect the collapse to come so quickly or expose such hollowness in his regime. This came as a shock to us, too.”
Saeed Laylaz, an analyst close to the reformist government of Masoud Pezeshkian, said: “Assad had become more of a liability than an ally, which means his time had run out. Defending him was no longer justifiable, even if it marked a major setback for Iran.
“Continuing to support him simply didn’t make sense and would have had unaffordable costs.”
Iran’s clout in the region has been severely weakened by Israeli attacks on its personnel and assets in Syria and on Hizbollah, its proxy militant group in Lebanon, depleting its ability to support the Assad regime.
At the same time, Iranian officials viewed Assad as increasingly unreliable, if not outright treacherous, while analysts and insiders accused him of failing to prevent Israeli strikes on Iranian targets in his country.
The insider said there had been long-standing frustration with Assad in Tehran. “For more than a year, it was clear his time had passed. He had become an obstacle, a liability — some even called him a betrayer. His inaction cost us dearly, and he aligned himself with regional actors who promised him a future that never materialised.”
Some within Iran’s government believed Assad had begun courting Arab states such as the United Arab Emirates, lured by promises of postwar reconstruction aid in exchange for distancing himself from Iran, said analysts and politicians.
In the aftermath of Assad’s fall to insurgents led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a Sunni rebel group, recriminations have mounted within Tehran’s leadership. “People within his regime were leaking information about the whereabouts of Iranian commanders,” the insider claimed. “Assad turned his back on us when we needed him most.”
A foreign diplomat said that Iranians and some Syrian loyalists “seem to have moved towards Iraq”. They said that members of Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guards, who have been present in Syria for more than a decade, have been leaving, along with diplomats and families, “in large numbers over the past several days”.
The fall of Assad, whose family ruled for more than five decades, comes as a devastating blow to Iran’s foreign policy. For decades, Tehran has anchored its strategy on an “axis of resistance” against the US and Israel, leveraging a network of proxies across the region.
Syria was a critical link in this chain, serving as a gateway for Iran to supply and fund Hizbollah in Lebanon, Shia militias in Iraq and the Houthis in Yemen. That link has now been severed, after Syrian rebels captured Damascus in what proved to be the final chapter of Assad’s regime.
The speed of the offensive shocked observers, achieving in less than two weeks what opposition forces had failed to accomplish in 13 years of devastating war. Tehran had long derided HTS as “terrorists” aligned with US and Israeli interests.
Assad’s two main backers — Russia and Iran — did little to help him as the endgame approached. Russia has been preoccupied with its war in Ukraine, and Iran with its conflict with Israel that shifted from shadow operations to open confrontation. That conflict added to more than a decade of debilitating US sanctions to badly deplete Iran’s financial and military resources.
For now, Tehran is taking a cautious approach, waiting to assess the intentions of Syria’s new rulers. Iran’s foreign ministry has called for Syria’s “territorial integrity” to be respected and has signalled a willingness to work with the UN to address the crisis.
Restoring influence in Syria and Lebanon will be an immense task for Tehran. In Syria, Israeli air strikes over the past year killed at least 19 Iranian commanders and targeted facilities critical to Tehran’s regional operations. In Lebanon, Hizbollah — its most powerful regional proxy — has been hard hit by Israel’s campaign, which assassinated senior leaders and targeted its infrastructure, weaponry and civilian affiliates ahead of a ceasefire agreed last month.
Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi insisted on Sunday that Hizbollah would remain resilient. He told state TV that the group had sufficient weapons to sustain itself “for one or two years” while exploring alternative supply routes.
Tehran is equally concerned about potential spillover into Iraq, its western neighbour, where Shia militias remain a linchpin of its regional policy.
Asghar Zarei, an analyst close to the regime, said that Assad had “misbehaved” since the Hamas-Israel war in October 2023, without giving details.
“Unfortunately, everything we built over 40 years fell apart overnight,” he said on state television. “Rebuilding our position will be extremely difficult. We must ensure this does not happen in Iraq or Yemen. It’s time to tighten our belts elsewhere.”
Some Iranian analysts argue that co-operation with HTS, despite the group’s Sunni Islamist orientation, could help Iran maintain some influence. Ali Motahhari, a former parliamentarian, called for pragmatic engagement.
“We should negotiate with HTS,” he said, noting that the militant group, while opposed to Shias, also shared Iran’s opposition to Israel.
Israel does not expect Iranian influence in its back yard to melt away. “Iran thrives in chaos. To say that Iran is retreating in Syria, or Hizbollah is running away, is premature,” said a senior Israeli official. “There are plausible scenarios where we still have to deal with Iran on our Syrian border for another decade.”
Hardliners in Iran have pushed for an aggressive response. Ahmad Naderi, a hardline MP, suggested that Tehran must simultaneously “revive the injured resistance front” and conduct a nuclear weapons test to reassert its regional position.
Others urge caution. “Iran cannot do much in the region for now,” said Laylaz. “Rebuilding Hizbollah and assessing the new Middle Eastern order will take time. Until then, Iran must tread carefully.”
Cartography by Cleve Jones and Steven Bernard
Read the full article here
