Assad ascended to power in 2000 following the demise of his father Hafez, who governed the nation for 29 years with authoritarian approach. Initially, there were expectations that Assad may be distinct – more transparent, less ruthless. However, those were short-lived.
The Arab Spring found its way into Syria in 2011, when the Syrian people demanded political and economic reforms. However, this political revolution swiftly devolved into a sectarian division, fuelled by both regional and extra regional powers, exacerbating the Syrian civil war, which had been raging for many years. The Asad regime endured the civil war, bolstered by the comprehensive support and backing of both Iran and Russia. In 2015, Russia intervened directly to guarantee the continuation of Asad’s regime. However, in recent weeks, events have taken a significant turn in Syria. The insurgents, spearheaded by the Islamist militant organization Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), recently captured Aleppo, the nation’s second-largest city, with minimal opposition. Subsequently, Hama, followed by the pivotal center of Homs days later. The advance of insurgents from both the east and the south has effectively encircled Damascus, rendering the city isolated amidst the ongoing offensive. Within a few hours, combatants infiltrated the capital, the epicentre of Assad’s authority. Reports indicate that Al-Assad has departed the country for an undisclosed location, marking the conclusion of over 53 years of his family’s autocratic governance in Syria.
A week ago, it was almost impossible to imagine that Bashar al-Assad would be removed from power. But it’s also true that the Syrian army might have lost the war years ago if other countries (Iran and Russia) hadn’t stepped in and helped. This big change in Syria has huge effects on the people there and on the peace in the area and around the world. I’m going to talk about and analyze what it means for Russia, Iran, and Israel here.
Russia
The overthrow of the Asad regime by Syrian rebels, spearheaded by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), underscores Moscow’s failure to assume a transformative role in the region. This phenomenon can be ascribed to the involvement of Russia in Ukraine, which has significantly depleted its military resources and compromised its capacity to concentrate on various fronts concurrently.
The overthrow of the Assad administration diminished Russia’s ability to project force in the area, undermining its claims to be a great power. Russia now faces the genuine risk of losing both a naval station and an air base in warm seas. There could be serious geopolitical repercussions for Russian influence globally if Moscow’s ability to move in the Mediterranean and Africa is compromised.
Iran
The Iranian-backed factions known as the “Axis of Resistance” in opposition to the supposed unholy alliance of the United States and Israel against Muslims are currently facing serious defeats as a result of recent events. The axis of resistance includes Syria’s Asad dictatorship, Lebanon’s Hezbollah, Yemen’s Houthis, Iraqi militias, and Gaza’s Hamas. Iran supplied Hezbollah with a substantial amount of equipment and munitions, and the Assad-led Syrian government was crucial in ensuring that this supply continued. Hezbollah’s position has deteriorated significantly over the past year due to the confrontation with Israel, and its future is uncertain. Hezbollah’s current leader, Naim Qassem, has promised that his group will support the Syrian government in its fight against what he claims is jihadist assault financed by the United States and Israel. Following Israel’s announcement of Hassan Nasrallah’s murder, this statement was made. Israel has launched a ground and air campaign against Hezbollah in Lebanon over the last three months, destroying the group’s leadership and leaving its members to rebuild. The result of this could be that Hezbollah is not as strong as it was when it fought with rebel groups in Syria.
As one American official put it to CNN, “Iran’s artifice” in the Middle East is crumbling due to what’s happening in Syria. The demise of Hezbollah and Hamas, two crucial Iranian proxies, in Israeli confrontations throughout the previous fourteen months led to the overthrow of Assad, who was backed by Tehran.
Thus, with the collapse of Asad’s regime, Iran experienced a significant diminishment of its foundational support within the Axis of Resistance. The significant setback experienced by Hezbollah due to Israel’s actions, coupled with the potential downfall of Assad, represents a critical blow to Iran’s endeavors to exert influence in the Middle East. It is evident that a relationship exists between the two, as the vulnerability of Hezbollah, particularly following the removal of its leader Hassan Nasrallah—who was deeply invested in preserving Assad—has hastened the downfall of the Syrian regime. The importance of the Assad administration to Iran is profound and cannot be minimized. In his absence, Iran’s ability to rejuvenate Hezbollah’s power has notably waned, as has its potential to threaten Israel from this front. Syria served as a crucial link in the geographical continuum from Iran to Lebanon, thereby establishing the “Shia crescent” and affording Iran exceptional strategic depth while also protecting its borders from conflict.
However, the fall of the regime demonstrates how little Iran had to help Assad in the absence of Hezbollah. This truth also shows how weak Iran is and how little it can do to change events in the Middle East without using a proxy. Without the actual assistance of its proxies, Iran will now need to chart a new road and come up with a solution that will improve its capacity to dissuade Israel and the US on its own.
Iran will probably now work to improve its conventional capabilities by replacing its damaged missiles from the Israeli attack and repairing its air defense system. However, Tehran will also probably consider whether to revise its nuclear policy in order to move closer to a nuclear weapon or to make more substantial concessions to the West in the hopes of achieving a nuclear deal that will lessen the likelihood of an outside strike on Iran.
Israel
In truth, a multitude of Hezbollah commanders and their associated weapon stockpiles have been the focus of Israeli airstrikes in Lebanon over the preceding months. Given Hezbollah’s inability to replenish its resources as a result of ongoing assaults in Syria, the Syrian opposition forces perceived a strategic opportunity to exploit this vulnerability and initiate an offensive on Aleppo. Such a scenario could only unfold if the opposition were confident that Hezbollah would refrain from providing the Assad government with adequate support, as it has in previous instances. Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu reacted to Assad’s downfall by calling it a “historic day” and blaming the defeat of Iran and Hezbollah, two groups that had been Assad’s strongest supporters in Lebanon, for the downfall of the Syrian leader.
As Assad’s administration falls in Damascus, Israel has assumed control of a buffer zone on the Golan Heights.Israel captured a portion of the Golan Heights in 1967. In 1974, they built a buffer zone between their territory and that of Syria. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that “Syrian forces have abandoned their positions” after Bashar al-Assad was deposed on Sunday, violating the two nations’ 50-year-old “disengagement agreement”. He said “We will not let any hostile force set up shop on our border”.
With the collapse of Assad’s regime a wide range of elements could influence Israel’s strategic approach. Hezbollah stands as a formidable opponent to Israel within the region, having bolstered its influence through a strategic alliance with the Assad regime. The potential downfall of Assad may jeopardize Hezbollah’s supply lines and strategic positioning within Syria, thereby complicating the group’s efforts to enhance its capabilities in opposition to Israel. Given the possibility of political fragmentation or internal conflict within Syria, there may be a corresponding decline in the overall unity of Arab states in their opposition to Israel. In this context, Israel may perceive a chance to cultivate novel diplomatic ties or alliances with various Arab nations, leveraging the void created by Syria’s disintegration.
The opposition remains fragmented, rendering the current political alternative to Assad less than satisfactory. The implications of the Assad regime’s overthrow on the wealth and regional security of the Syrian populace remain uncertain at this juncture. There exists a possibility that emerging leadership in Damascus may seek to establish normalized relations with Israel, despite the fact that the future of Russian military installations, the US-supported Syrian Democratic Forces in the northeast, interim governance structures, counterterrorism initiatives, and Syria’s evolving role within the regional context may remain uncertain for an extended period. ( The writer is: Assistant Professor at Muslim Youth University Islamabad). The article reflects the author’s opinion and not necessarily the views of WNAM
