"...Iran-Syria relations teach a significant lesson for understanding the balances in the region. During the Iraq-Iran war, Khomeini’s Iran established a strategic alliance with Syria. Rapprochement with Iran was a sign that Syria was prepared to sacrifice Saddam’s Iraq. Iran rewarded this by providing Syria 1 billion dollars worth of free oil and commercial privileges. In return, Syria let Iran’s Revolutionary Guards move to Lebanon in order to train Hezbollah. In this way, Iran, exhilarated by the Islamic revolution, was now able to reach the Israeli border. No longer suffering from diplomatic isolation, Iran responded to NATO-member Turkey’s rapprochement with Iraq by first inviting the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK, to its own land and then allowing them to move to northern Iraq. The Syria-Iran relations of the past continue up to this day, despite minor crises.
The rise to power of a “democratic” Muslim Brotherhood with the mediatized and psychological support of the West would mean that Syria will no longer belong to the Shiite bloc. Losing an ally like Syria would force Iran to lose a highly important geopolitical space and also instigate serious psychological trauma. Under such circumstances, Turkey will most likely leave aside the politics of balancing and begin to embrace its role as a new member of the Sunni bloc. It would be no surprise at all if Turkey-Iran relations acquired a new shape in the near future. "
Friday, June 24, 2011
'The rise of a “democratic” Muslim Brotherhood with the support of the West would mean that Syria no longer belongs to the Shiite bloc'
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
This may have been true once but seems less likely now.
Iran has gained an awful lot since 2000. In Iraq it has gained a partner with the Shiites easily dominating now that the Sunni dictatorship has ended. Iraq alone gives Iran a huge amount of strategic depth into the Middle East that it didn't have between 1979-2002.
Hezbollah has risen to full political and military power in Lebanon. Bahrain may present Iran to get its toe in the door of the Arabian peninsula. Finally Egypt is more likely to be more independent than previously.
But on the Syria question itself there is alot of grays. Could be that Syria if Assad goes will still be friendly towards Iran. After all Syria is going to remain as Anti Israel as ever because that is the will of the people. Also Syrian military must now that continuing to continuing to supply weapons to Hezbollah will allow them some continuing power in Lebanon.
Finally with Turkey I don't see it moving all that far away from Iran. In fact trade has been increasing and there is the Tabriz Ankara pipeline, Nabbucco and all the wriggling about Iran on that one and the proposed Persian Pipeline which will pipe gas from the Fars gasfield in Iran over Turkey and into Europe ending in Switzerland.
Turkey ain't gonna move away from Iran. Syria's foreign policy with regards to Israel seems popular with the people and unlikely to change. Egypt will likely be more independent. Iran has gained alot of control within Iraq.
The idea of Iran suffering "diplomatic isolation" is not even a threat.
Mr. Anon, Syria will not necessarily remain anti-Israel due to the "will of the people." What if the new "leadership" signs a quick peace deal with concessions no one in the public knows about, what then? Was the will of the people of Egypt to blockade and starve Palestinians in Gaza? If you want a more "democratic" example, is it the will of the American people to be more pro-Israel than pro-US, or is it because of the 2-party Zionist-controlled "democracy"? The will of the people is meaningless. If it ever comes near being meaningful, the government just offers distractions, such as a new "failed" terrorist attempt by some random "Muslim convert".
Post a Comment