Iran has been associated with historical relations with Syria since the era of the late President Hafez al -Assad, and this relationship reached its climax after 2011 when his ousted President Bashar al -Assad used Iranian support to confront the popular revolution and the armed factions it produced.
In these developments, Tehran found an opportunity to expand its influence in the region and secure its way to the Mediterranean, and complete the link between it with Syria and Lebanon, through Iraq.
Despite the high cost that Iran paid to protect the regime, the fall of Assad in late 2024 was a turning point in the scene and Tehran found itself outside the Syrian scene largely after a 4 -decade relationship, especially after the power in the country assumed a government that emerged from the military factions of the revolution.
Double of Iranian abuse
Iran has been doubled with the new Syrian administration, as it has been quick to communicate with it since it was working under the name “Military Operations Management”.
A member of the Presidency of the National Security and Foreign Policy Committee in the Iranian Parliament Yaqoub Reda Zada revealed in December 2024 that Tehran conveyed indirect messages to the “military operations management” in which she appealed to the security of the Iranian embassy and holy places, and pledges were made not to prejudice these sites.
On the other hand, prominent Iranian officials launched an attack on the new Syrian administration, and the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei considered it a “authoritarian system that serves America’s interests”, and expected that “honorable” would confront it.
After a series of waves of rebellion launched by the lion regime’s remnants in the Syrian coast region against the new government, the last and the largest of which was last March, reports spoke about the role of Iran and the Lebanese Hezbollah in this rebellion.
The warnings launched by Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan also strengthened the belief that there is an Iranian role in supporting the rebellion against the new Syrian administration.
Fidan Tehran warned of the repercussions of providing support to the Syrian Democratic Forces “SDF” or any other parties in Syria with the aim of feeding the turmoil, and demanded that it be abandoned its traditional policies, because its excitement in any country may lead to a similar reaction.
The Iranian escalation coincided with the assurances of the government of President Ahmed al -Sharaa that the overthrow of the Assad regime ended the Iranian presence in Syria, in addition to the fact that the control of the new government over the country led to cutting the way of Iran’s supplies towards the Lebanese Hezbollah, according to what the party’s Secretary -General Naim Qasim confirmed in late 2024.
These statements suggest that Tehran is looking to escalate pressure papers on the new Syrian government to restore its role in Syria, and at the same time open to negotiation and dialogue with it.
Exchange of positive messages
Clear changes occurred in the Iranian dialect towards the new Syrian administration after the 12 -day war between it and Israel in June 2025, and it seemed as if to be searching for participants with the general countries of the region and Syria in particular, and Tehran condemned the Israeli raids on the Syrian government forces who tried to enter the Suwayda Governorate in July.
The Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqji also stressed after the incident on his country’s support for Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and it is noteworthy that Araqji made these statements in the wake of the Israeli bombing of the headquarters of the Staff of the New Syrian Army, and the vicinity of the presidential palace in Damascus.
For his part, Syrian President Al -Shara sent a positive message to Iran during a television interview published by the Syrian official media on September 12, and stressed that there will be no permanent break with Iran, although the “wound is great”, noting that things will go towards establishing relations that there will be respect for the Syrian situation and not to arouse sectarian sedition.
According to special sources that spoke to Al -Jazeera Net, Iran has already sent a message through regional brokers to the Syrian president, in which it was offered to develop relations, joint coordination against Israeli attacks, and allow them to contact the Lebanese Hezbollah.
She pledged not to interfere in the Syrian internal affairs, which indicates that the statements made by Sharia come in the context of responding to Iranian messages, by leaving the door to the Iranian offer, while linking approval to the extent of Tehran’s willingness to change its behavior.
The motives of both parties to calm down
It is clear that the threats surrounding both Iran and the new Syrian administration are the ones that pushing the two parties to calm after months of field and media escalation.
Last June, Iran lived difficult conditions in light of the Israeli attacks, because the confrontations broke out in a state of isolation that Iran suffers as a result of multiple conflicts with neighboring countries, and its loss of the ability to invest the Syrian and Lebanese arenas to create a kind of deterrence for Israel.
For its part, the Syrian administration collided with public and strong Israeli interference on the Syrian affairs after Tel Aviv’s involvement in supporting rebellious Druze groups in As -Suwayda, and carrying out support attacks against government forces last July.
The most important thing is that the statements of the American envoy to Syria Thomas Barack indicated that Washington’s intention to stop Israeli attacks on the countries of the region, where he said, “Israel is hitting where it wants at the time it wants.”
It seems that the Israeli security challenge towards Syria prompted the Sharia president to also send positive messages to the Lebanese Hezbollah, so he clarified during his meeting with a group of media people last August that his country came up with the wounds caused by the party in Syria, adding in justifying his lack of interference in the Lebanese affairs, “We do not want to make statements that some parties in Lebanon are enthusiastic against the party.”
Meanwhile, Damascus and Baghdad are making efforts to develop relations between the two sides for security and economic considerations, the most important of which is coordination in order to prevent the activity of the Islamic State again, in addition to cooperation in the field of energy by activating the Kirkuk-Banias oil line, which benefits both parties.
However, these efforts collide with the reservations of Iraqi political forces within the ruling coalition with an alliance with Iran, as these forces opposed last May the presence of the Islamic summit in Baghdad despite the Iraqi government inviting it, and Damascus was satisfied with sending Foreign Minister Asaad Al -Shaibani to represent them at the summit, and it is possible that the calm with Iran will lead to more progress in Iraqi -Syrian relations.
In general, the calm between Tehran and the Syrian government is consistent with the regional context, and the growing concerns of the extremist Israeli government’s approach that tried on September 9th to the assassination of the Hamas delegation delegation during a meeting in the Qatari capital, Doha, and sent a clear message to the countries of the region that it does not adhere to any red line.
Doha hosted a week after the Israeli attack, an emergency Arab and Islamic summit, in the presence of Syrian Presidents Ahmed Al -Shara, and the Iranian Masoud Bouchakian.
Obstacles in the face of normalization of relationships
Although there are motives in Damascus and Tehran that drive them to calm, and test the possibility of overcoming the effects of the past, there are many obstacles that stand in the way of normalizing relations between the two sides.
In the current stage, the Syrian administration focuses on completing the lifting of US sanctions on its leaders and Syria in general, and the Sharia president is preparing to go to New York to deliver a speech during the meeting of the United Nations General Assembly in late September, and Syria is also involved in security talks with Israel in order to stabilize the rules of calm and prevent Israeli attacks on Syrian soil.
Consequently, it is not expected that the Syrian administration will venture with openness to Iran in the short term, especially since this openness may anger the current US administration, which adopts an escalatory approach against Iran, and it is likely that Syria will continue this approach as long as a new nuclear agreement has been reached between Washington and Tehran.
In early September, the President has alluded to the unwillingness to give an excuse to Israel, which wanted to make Syria an arena for conflict with Iran.
Also, it is not possible to categorically asserting that there is a strong desire for Tehran to normalize the relationship with the new Syrian administration, as long as the latter refuses to return to Syria because it is a bitter weapon towards Lebanon.
This can be deduced from the statement of the Secretary -General of the Supreme Council of Iranian National Security, Ali Larijani, who linked normalization with “what Damascus will do on the ground” and that his country prefers first “vision of clear arrangements.”
Consequently, the current positive Iranian messages may be related to the pressures it suffers as a result of fears of the return of Israeli attacks against them with the approval of the Trump administration, and this positive tone may be retracted if Tehran does not see indicators of Damascus’s readiness seriously to normalize and allow again an Iranian influence in Syria.
(Tagstotranslate) Politics (T) Middle East (T) Syria (T) Arabic