President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran and President Bashar Assad of Syria
reconfirmed the close alliance between their two countries during the Iranian
president's visit to Damascus this week.
Ahmadinejad's visit came on the eve of the return of two senior US officials,
Jeffrey Feltman and Daniel Shapiro, to Damascus. Their visit is part of ongoing
US efforts at engagement with Syria. The tone struck by Ahmadinejad and Assad
this week, however, did not suggest a mood for compromise.
Syrian President Bashar Assad, in his address to the joint press conference
held by the two presidents after their meeting, accurately summed up the
Iranian-Syrian alliance as based upon both "principles and interests."
It is sometimes suggested that the Syrian-Iranian alliance is a marriage of
convenience between two essentially incompatible regimes. This view is
incorrect. The alliance is of long standing, is rooted in shared interests and
expresses itself in a shared ideological conception - that of the idea of
muqawama (resistance) to the supposed ambitions of the West and Israel in the
region.
Ahmadinejad's and Assad's statements following their meeting offer evidence of
the depth and nature of the alliance.
The Iranian president mocked US attempts at engagement, saying "We don't
want honey from bees that sting us. Efforts must be made to rid the region of
the presence of foreigners." He went on to demand US withdrawal from
"Afghanistan and the borders of Pakistan."
Ahmadinejad's speech radiated the sense that Iranian defiance was bringing
results. The Iranian president noted that those who once sought to put pressure
on Syria and Iran were now obliged to seek the assistance of these countries.
"Harmony and steadfastness," he said, "are the secret of
victory." He went on to demand reform of the United Nations, reiterating a
claim he made in his recent Geneva speech that the international body failed to
reflect a world in which the balance of forces was changing.
The Syrian president struck a similar tone. Assad said that Ahmadinejad's visit
confirmed once more the "strategic relationship" between the two
countries. He expressed the support of Syria and Iran for Palestinian
"resistance."
Assad then detailed Syria and Iran's common satisfaction regarding current
developments in Iraq, and noted Syria's support for the Iranian nuclear program.
He also cast an eye over the history of the relationship between the two
countries. He noted that Syria had supported Iran at the time of the Islamic
Revolution and in the subsequent Iran-Iraq War, and that Damascus had in return
benefited from Iranian support when under pressure in recent years.
The words of the two presidents, for those listening closely, are instructive in
grasping both the principles and the interests underlying the Syrian-Iranian
alliance.
Regarding principles - the two speeches reflect the joint adoption of a secular
language of nationalist, anti-Western assertion which is reminiscent of earlier
times.
These ideas may have faded from view in the West in recent years, but they
retain popularity among broad populations in the Arab world. The Iranians -
non-Sunnis and non-Arabs - want to enlist this appeal to their own banner,
presenting themselves as the natural representative of all those countries and
forces opposing the West in the region.
Syria, meanwhile, has long been the chief guardian among the Arabs of the
archaic slogans of third-worldism and defiance. Iranian rhetoric of this kind
sits well with the Syrians. The Assad regime, of course, is committed ultimately
to its own survival, and not to any ideological path. But there is no sense that
an alliance based on an appeal of this kind is in any way unnatural or
uncomfortable for the Syrians. On the contrary, it fits perfectly the defiant
stance that has enabled the Syrian Ba'athists to punch above their weight in the
region for a generation.
Regarding interests, Assad's whistle-stop tour through the history of the
relationship reminds us of its longevity.
The mullahs in Teheran and the Ba'athist family dictatorship in Damascus have
stuck together for a long time.
The Syrian dictator's expressions of quiet satisfaction at the current turn of
events in Iraq, and Ahmadinejad's characteristic tone of triumphalism confirm
that the partnership continues to bear fruit.
The next arena for the meeting point of Syrian and Iranian principles and
interests is Lebanon, which may shortly be added to the regional alliance headed
by these countries. Next month's Lebanese elections formed the backdrop to
Ahmadinejad's visit, and perhaps explain the hurried return of Feltman and
Shapiro. No doubt the two US officials will reassert the need for
noninterference in the upcoming polls, which the Hizbullah-led alliance is
favored to win.
Lebanon has long been the ideal arena for the meeting of Iranian and Syrian
principles and interests. It is worth remembering that as far back as 1982, it
was Syrian facilitation of the entry of 1,500 Iranian Revolutionary Guards into
the Lebanese Bekaa which made possible the subsequent foundation of Hizbullah.
This long investment may be about to pay off.
In any case, the general direction of events in the region appears to the liking
of the two good friends from Damascus and Teheran - offering the prospect of
many good years of friendship to come.
