Assad’s Mistake Is Changing Game Rules

Anyone familiar with Hafez al-Assad’s style of administration concerning internal or regional crises, is aware of the differences between him and Assad the son. Despite Assad the father being the Syrian ruler who established the violence inherent in the regime and the most extreme levels of oppression during the 1980s, Bashar al-Assad became the bloodiest Syrian president in history.

Ever since he inherited the power in 1970, Assad had never faced the international or Arab community, relying on all his confrontations inside Syria or with neighboring countries on regional and sometimes international mandate. In the 1973 war, he used the Arabs and Russians as cover, along with the strength of the Egyptian army, and his periodic agreements with President Anwar Sadat. When he entered Lebanon in 1975, he relied on Arab mandate, not wanting to get involved in Lebanon, but Assad assumed the task, even in agreements with Israel, making the Syrian army the Arab representative in Lebanon.

In the 1980s, facing of the rebellion of the Muslim Brotherhood, he relied on Western support, which was wary of any Islamic movement, gaining European and American protection, even the Arabs turned a blind eye. Thus, Assad created a balance, moving between regional and international lines, deepening the relations with Iran while at the same time opening channels with the Gulf. He was aware of the necessity of such balance because of Syria’s strategic location and direct contact with Israel. In fact, Assad killed as many Palestinians in Lebanon as Israel did, and yet he managed to contain Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the Popular Front led by Ahmed Jibril.

Hafez al-Assad’s philosophy determined Syria’s role in the region, up to his death in 2010, after which Syria entered a new political, security, and geopolitical age. While he kept the “tradition” of security culture alive and well, Bashar al-Assad reshaped a new political mentality that changed the nature of Syria’s role in the region.

While he kept the “tradition” of security culture alive and well, Bashar al-Assad reshaped a new political mentality that changed the nature of Syria’s role in the region.

Bashar al-Assad jumped on the Iranian bandwagon and in February 2005, Rafik Hariri was assassinated in February 2005, after which the Syrian army left Lebanon after thirty years of absolute rule. He lost the sectarian and religious half of Lebanon, Christians turned against him, the Sunni political class severed all connections, and even Walid Jumblatt renounced his allegiance. Assad also lost the most important Arab treasury in Saudi Arabia, and France’s historical support to Syria.

In just five years since coming to power in 2005, Assad achieved a political upheaval that showed his plan to play on a different note than his father, in other words, to change the rules of the game. Hence, Syria left behind a familiar system towards a new stage, a game of “axes” with the participation of Iran.

Everyone knows that Assad is a big fan of Iranian leader Ali Khamenei and Hezbollah’s Secretary General Hassan, and that he believes in Iran’s Axis of Resistance. While Assad the father wanted to establish a balance with Tehran, Bashar al-Assad broke that rule leading to a shift of Iranian influence at the expense of Syria’s geopolitical weight as well as Syria’s alienation from the other Arab countries, specifically Egypt and Saudi Arabia, which in 1991 were the triumvirate of the region after the siege of Iraq.

Assad’s move to join Iran’s Axis has been very costly, isolating him from both the Arab and Western countries. Iran has penetrated all economic, military, political and even social levels in Syria. And instead of expanding his regional and international relations, Assad only succeeded in creating more enemies in Lebanon and Jordan by falling for the traps of Iran and throwing himself between its arms.

The irony is that the regime has been boycotting Saddam Hussein’s Baathist regime for decades, while being the biggest supporter of the sectarian Iraqi government during Nuri al-Maliki’s rule, who is one way or another part of a political Islamic movement. And perhaps this is sufficient to understand the depth of Iran’s influence on one of the most important centers of power in the Arab world.

Abdullah Alghadawi – Writer and journalist