The lightning assault by Syrian rebels that has seen them seize control of Aleppo, Syria’s second city, is a classic case of how the law of unintended consequences can cause dramatic changes to the global landscape.
With so much turmoil taking place in the Middle East, Syria’s long-running civil war, which began in 2011, has become something of a sideshow. This is despite Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad being accused of war crimes for his role in an estimated 500,000 deaths during the conflict, and for forcing half the country’s 25 million population to flee their homes.
While Syria merited the occasional mention in the broader context of Israel’s ferocious military campaign against Iranian-backed terror groups in Gaza and Lebanon, it was usually after the country found itself the victim of collateral damage. One case was Israel’s bombing in April of Iran’s consulate in Damascus, which operated as a hub for planning terrorist operations.
As for the regime itself, its main preoccupation has been to prevent Assad being drawn into Israel’s military campaign against Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. This is no easy task given that most of the terror group’s weaponry is shipped from Iran via Damascus airport.
Assad’s desperation not to become involved in a direct military conflict with Israel has meant his regime has been reluctant to act when Israeli warplanes attacked targets on Syrian territory. Assad’s insistence on remaining neutral in Israel’s war with Hezbollah even led the Biden administration to give serious thought to restoring ties with the regime in return for Damascus ending its long-standing alliance with Iran.
Such diplomatic considerations will now need to be put on the back burner in the wake of the Syrian opposition’s unexpected capture of Aleppo, as well as other areas of northern Syria. This development has, at a stroke, plunged the Assad regime back into crisis.
A decade or so ago, the last time the Syrian dictator faced a real prospect of being overthrown, his regime was saved by the support it received from its allies in Tehran and Moscow.
Iran regarded keeping Assad in power as vital to sustaining its efforts to spread its terrorist tentacles throughout the Arab world. The Kremlin, meanwhile, whose close ties with Damascus date back to the Soviet era, was keen to maintain its bases in Syria, especially the naval facility at Tartus, the Russian Navy’s only operational base in the Mediterranean.
Russian president Vladimir Putin’s decision, taken at Iran’s behest, to intervene militarily in Syria helped to turn the tide of the conflict in Assad’s favour. Russian bombers destroyed rebel strongholds in cities like Aleppo, while Iranian forces, including its Hezbollah proxies from neighbouring Lebanon, led the ground offensive.
Unfortunately for Assad, these allies are unlikely to again come to his regime’s rescue on a similar scale, not least because of the changes that have taken place to the global geopolitical landscape over the past year or so.
The devastating losses the Russian military has suffered in Ukraine since Putin’s invasion in February 2022 mean that Moscow is in no position to divert precious resources to keep Assad in power. Russia’s military contingent in Syria has been significantly scaled back from 2015 levels, as troops have been redeployed to the Ukrainian front.
Iran, too, finds itself under intense pressure after the enormous losses Hamas and Hezbollah have suffered in Gaza and Lebanon respectively. While Tehran has pledged to support Assad, finding the means to do so will prove problematic given the enormous manpower losses Hezbollah has suffered in recent months.
The weakened positions of both Iran and Russia no doubt influenced the timing of the rebels’ decision to launch their assault against Aleppo. They were aware that, without support from Tehran and Moscow, Assad’s forces would struggle to defend themselves.
The machinations of Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, whose Islamist agenda is to recreate the glories of the Ottoman Empire, is another important consideration in the unfolding drama in northern Syria.
Erdoğan is bitterly opposed to the US-backed Kurdish enclave established on the Syrian border. It was created as a result of the campaign to destroy Islamic State’s so-called caliphate in northern Syria. By backing the rebels, Erdoğan is aiming to derail the Kurds’ ultimate goal of establishing their own state, while also putting Assad’s secular regime under pressure.
How this highly complex geopolitical puzzle ultimately unfolds will depend both on the rebels’ own agenda, including how much Syrian territory they seek to conquer, and the ability of Assad and his allies to save the regime from collapse.
The fall of Assad would certainly constitute a major strategic disaster for both Russia and Iran. For Putin, losing access to Russia’s military bases in Syria would only add to the humiliations his forces have already suffered in Ukraine, while the heavy losses Iran’s terrorist allies have already suffered in Gaza and Lebanon would be compounded by Assad’s overthrow.
Russia and Iran will be desperately hoping they can once again ride to Assad’s rescue. Failure to do so could have profound consequences not just for the Syrian dictator, but the autocratic regimes in Moscow and Tehran.
Discussion about this post