We start with a supposition which has the guarantee of becoming reality, namely that President Assad and his Baath regime will be overthrown. The only question is when. Today, we are facing an impasse, after 21 months of conflict which has left 60 thousand dead, thousands of refugees and a country in ruins.
President Assad, in a speech delivered on January 6, offered no concessions and vowed never to talk to foes he branded terrorists and Western puppets, while the UN-Arab League mediator, Lakhtar Brahimi ruled out a role for President Assad in a transitional government, stressing that “In Syria… what people are saying is that a family ruling for 40 years is a little bit too long”.
The Syrian foreign ministry reacted vehemently, denouncing Brahimi as “flagrantly biased”, without, however, excluding working with him to find a political solution to the crisis.
A similar deadlock exists at the diplomatic level between the United States and Russia.
On January 11, their envoys met in Geneva with Brahimi and called for a political solution to end the conflict, but reached no breakthrough. The US position is that Assad has lost all legitimacy and must step aside, whereas Russia insists that Assad must not be forced out by external powers and that his exit cannot be a precondition for a Syrian political dialogue. This disagreement is also reflected in the UN Security Council which is unable to reach a decision because of a Russian veto which is conveniently being used by Western powers as an excuse for inaction.
Syria is at the epicentre of a troubled region where Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Turkey are competing for regional mastery and religious confrontation between Sunnis and Shiite has reached its climax.
As a result, the interaction of these events determines the stand of countries which play a role in the region.
Turkey’s friendly relations with Syria belong to the past. Today, Turkey openly supports the Syrian opposition, offering refuge to the members of the National Syrian Council, arming the Free Syrian Army and accepting thousands of Syrian refugees on her territory.
In response, President Assad has allowed the establishment of PKK bases on the frontiers with Turkey, knowing that the Kurdish question is of serious concern to Turkey. Turkey’s action in the Middle East should be viewed within the framework of her ambition to become a regional power, which she is encouraged to pursue by her economic strength, the diminished influence of the USA in the region and the negative stand of Europeans towards her EU accession.
Turkey’s ambitions, however, are limited by Egypt’s dynamic return to the international scene and its opposition to Turkey’s hegemony in the region. Egypt’s President Mohamed Morsi has already asked President Assad to relinquish power and proposed the creation of a quartet (Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran) to solve the crisis.
On the opposite side are the supporters of Syria: Russia and Iran. The erstwhile ally and supplier of arms to Syria has a naval base in Tartous, which allows it to have an important role in the affairs of the Middle East and explains the support for Assad.
As far as Iran is concerned, it should be mentioned that Syria is the only country among Arab states with which Iran has excellent relations. On the one hand, Iran is using Syria in order to strengthen the Shiite community of Lebanon by sending arms and money to Hezbollah, whereas on the other hand Syria is benefitting from Iran’s commitment to undermine Israel.
Irrespective of these competitions, if eventually the Assad regime falls there will be a chain of consequences. Iran will suffer a major defeat. It will lose its only Arab ally and Hezbollah’s strength will be weakened in Lebanon, where the antagonism of pro-Syrians and anti-Syrians threatens the delicate balance achieved after a long civil war between Christians, Sunnis and Shiites. Furthermore, a fall of Assad will bring power to a variant of the Muslim Brotherhood and with the changes brought about by the “Arab Spring” Israel will be surrounded by hostile Sunni powers which will strengthen Hamas at the expense of Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah.
The only strategic benefit for Israel will be the weakening of Iran, although the danger of its nuclear programme will continue to exist.
Finally, success or failure of political Islam will have repercussions not only in the region, but also in the Muslim countries of the Balkans, the Caucasus and Central Asia. It is, therefore, for these reasons that we will be following closely developments in Syria this year as well.
