Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad paid a two-days official visit to Syria—Iran’s closest ally (19-20 January 2006). While, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad rushed to visit Iran just two days after Ahmadinejad sworn in, to pay his respects (7-9 August 2005), Ahmadinejad chose Damascus as his first bilateral mission abroad—two weeks before the emergency meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency's board (2 February) and when Damascus were faced with sever accusation for the February 2005 assassination for former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri. The visits thus signal the intimate relationships between the two. Yet, they reveal the growing pressure on both of them and the growing isolation of each of them.
The strategic alliance between the two countries, which has been established with the Iranian revolution (1979) and mainly during the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988) continued over two hectic decades. Tehran’s ties with Syria have been the closest relations it has had with any foreign state since the revolution. This has been so in spite of some basic disagreements and conflicting stances on major questions. In addition to the Ba‘thist secular and Arab-national ideology—which contradict basic revolutionary principles-Tehran was displeased with Syria’s support for the GCC, its participating in the American-led coalition in the 1991 Gulf War, the suppression of Islamism in Syria and even over policy in Lebanon their interests and politics were often in conflict. Syria’s peace talks with Israel in 1994-1996 was clearly not in line with Iran’s policy. Yet, taken all in all, Tehran proved fairly tolerant of such disagreements with its major ally.
In fact, the two have been the sole strategic allies of each other. They shared some foreign policy objectives, such as opposition to US "attempts to dominate" the Middle East, hostility toward Israel and support for Palestinian and Lebanese Islamists. Iran was therefore quick to demonstrate its support for Syria in 2004 after UN Security Council resolution called for the withdrawal of foreign forces from Lebanon. After Syria was charged with Hariri’s assassination, Iran, again, came to its support. On the eve of his visit, Ahmadinejad thus described bilateral relations as "strong and good.” He later added, that the relations between the two countries "are strong, brotherly and lasting, and we will strengthen them during this visit." Ahmadinejad cited developments in Iraq, Palestine and Lebanon as the main topics discussed with Syrian officials. He also said that during his meetings, various economic and trade and interests will be discussed.
Consolidating their old alliance was made increasingly crucial as both countries faced mounting US pressure and the threat of international sanctions. While Iran faces possible UN sanctions over its nuclear program (mainly its January decision to remove UN seals on the Natanz uranium enrichment equipment, which prompted the EU to break off two years of talks), Assad's regime was further isolated after a UN probe implicated it in the killing of Hariri.
For both countries, Lebanon was an important leg in the triangle. Both were closely involved in the emergence of Hizballah (early 1980s). For Iran, the Hizballah has been the flag ship in its aim of exporting its revolution. For Syria it carried a crucial strategic significance. Upon his arrival to Damascus, Ahmadinejad defended Syria against criticism of its interference in Lebanon and its alleged role in Hariri's murder. In their discussion, the two presidents stressed their determination, to prevent "the world arrogance and Zionism” to “fulfill their plots in Lebanon." The conservative paper Jomhuri-yi Islami wrote (3 January) that Hariri’s murder was an America-Zionists pretext for annexing Syria and Lebanon to the imperialist plot of a Greater Middle East. Iran and Syria called for stability in Lebanon, stressing "the need to support the resistance" to Israel. That Syria is the steadfast party confronting Israel, and Iran the defender of the Islamism, "obliges us to have more consultation and cooperation," Ahmadinejad said.
Assad, on his part, backed Iran on the nuclear issue, supporting “the right of Iran and any state in the world to acquire peaceful technology." In line with the Iranian position, he also maintained that a nuclear-free Middle East should begin with Israel. In their joint statement concluding the visit, the two presidents also stressed the need for implementation of UN resolutions mandating non-proliferation and a Middle East region free from Weapons of Mass Destructions, and called on the international community to monitor the nuclear activities of Israel and compel it to join the Non-Proliferation Treaty. The statement also stressed the right of all countries, including Iran, to use nuclear technology for peaceful purposes and condemned the double standards practiced by the West in this regard.
As in similar Iranians’ high-level meetings in Damascus, Lebanese and Palestinian issues were at the core of the discussions, and the Iranians also used the opportunity to meet their leadershipd. Ahmadinejad, thus, also met Hizballah’s Secretary General Hasan Nasrallah (20 January), upholding the organization’s message of genuine Islam for humanity. In his meeting with the speaker of the Lebanese parliament Nabih Berri, he similarly upheld "the importance of resistance." Ahmadinejad said that Israel "who once launched the slogan from Nile to the Euphrates, today lacks calm and security even inside its entity, and this is because of the good relations between Syria and Lebanon." He urged the Lebanese people to use all its power and wisdom to preserve unity and thus “block the way before enemy conspiracies."
The Palestinian question was another major issue, particulary as the visit took place on the eve of the elections. Ahmadinejad opined that the Palestinian movement was motivated by the success of Hezbollah which, in turn, was motivated by the success of the Islamic Revolution. The two presidents called for continued Palestinian resistance as the "only way" to end "the occupation of the holy Islamic lands" and restore Palestinians' rights. Ahmadinejad also met with leaders of numerous Palestinian movements including Islamic Jihad and Hamas. Ahmadinejad expressed "strong support” for the Palestinians’ struggle. Head of Islamic Jihad, Abdallah Ramadan Shaalah, Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal and Ahmed Jibril, Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command head were said to be at the meeting. Ahmadinejad stressed Iran’s support for the Palestinians’ just struggle and conveyed confidence that due to their “steadfastness, sacrifices and heroism” they “will be victorious.” In Damascus, again, Ahmadinejad described Israeli Jews as "migrants" and asked the Europeans to accommodate them in their countries, rather than in Palestine. He expressed confidence that no Jew would remain in Israel if European countries allowed them to immigrate.
The two presidents also called for an end to the occupation of Iraq. The establishment of a popular government and the withdrawal of foreign forces, they said, would contribute to the country's security and counter-terrorism.
In a joint statement issued at the end of the visit, Iran and Syria condemned the assassination of Hariri and called for an international inquiry "on a professional, judicial and neutral basis." They also condemned "any attempt to use this hateful crime for political ends so as to pressure Syria," warning of the "consequences to regional security and peace" if the investigation did not meet the standards of impartiality and fairness. They also urged an end to the occupation of Arab territories in the Golan Heights, Palestine and Lebanon and for restoring the legitimate rights of the Palestinian nation. Regarding Iraq, they conveyed support for the ongoing political process to establish an independent government, restoration of peace, security and unity among all Iraqi parties. Tehran and Damascus further expressed readiness to support and assist the new Iraqi government to return the country to have normal life. Condemning the upsurge of terrorist acts in Iraq, the two presidents urged the need for an American withdrawal as the main way to stabilize the country.
Ahmadinejad described his trip as producing "excellent results" and pointed to the solid and deep-rooted relations and their “common positions." In fact, the proved, once again, the close ties between the two countries, demonstrating that their relations remained firm even under the growing outside tensions and bilateral disputes. It is also clear that few issues were missing from public statements: what was discussed during Ahmadinejad’s meetings—with the Syrians as well as each of the Lebanese and Palestinian parties—on other issues: promoting the position of Hamas in the Palestinian elections, Iran’s particular interests in Lebanon etc. By nature of things, public statement do not stress the disagreements and mutual concerns, that have also existed.
But, clearly, such a demonstration of friendship was made necessary due to some inherent weaknesses and concerns. In many ways the two countries were the exclusive strategic allies of each other, lacking any significant international backing, at the time that each of them was under heavy pressure from the international community. Each also feared that the other side would ultimately change its attitude in face of such pressures. In many ways, it was Iran’s interest to keep Syria’s support, fearing that it might try to work out a deal with the US, which might lead to limiting its freedom in Lebanon. Finally, on the major and immediate challenges facing the two—Iran’s nuclear program and Syrian accusation for involvement in Hariri’s assassination—they are unlikely to be able to help solving each other’s problems. They have already gone much further.
JIME Center.All rights reserved.