Strategic aims of Bashar al-Assad’s visit to Iran

Bashar

Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad, traveled to Iran after years of fighting and struggling against terrorists, and when various Arab and Islamic countries is trying to meet him and bring him to various coalitions he visited Iran. In fact, this trip, which coincided with the decline of terrorism and the war in Syria, could be seen as the continuation of a warm and strategic relationship between the two countries.

Some Arab countries, such as the UAE and Saudi Arabia, which had an effective role in financial and armed support of terrorism in Syria, put the country in a terrible war while preparing their foreign policy to reopen the door of foreign relations with the Syrian government, and put all sorts of promises on the showcase of re-establishing ties with the Syrian government, whose main objective was not to expand Iran-Syria relations after the end of the war.

While Mr. Bashar proved that he had not only forgotten his friend for years in his war, but also plans to continue warm relations with it in the spring of victory.

The image of Bashar al-Assad in the bosom of the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Khamenei, has many unspoken words that Iran wants to show the whole world that Damascus will remain in Iran’s defense.

Al-Assad’s visit to Tehran while both Iran’s allies and enemies call for Tehran to leave Damascus, and this can be seen from the recent Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to Russia and his meeting with President Vladimir Putin.

Basically, choosing Tehran by Bashar al-Assad as his first post-war destination reflects the depth of strategic ties between the two countries and their stand on a single front against terrorism and the Western American plan in the region, which means sending a message to America and Israel, according to which Iranian forces remain in Syria.

Indeed, this trip was not only aimed at congratulating, but also was for coordinating how to deal with the Israeli-American threats; the threats that target both Iran and Syria and require a specific strategy to deal with it.

Now, Israel has to confront not only in one front, but also the various fronts that have previously been involved with terrorism-fueled by the Arabs, the United States. Benjamin Netanyahu has now realized with Bashar Assad’s visit to Tehran that the Iran’s withdrawal from Syria has become a dream that will not happen in reality.

On the other hand, the events and plots that Syria has been struggling in recent years has made the country’s president to analogize the Syrian crisis to the eight-year imposed war against Iran in the meeting with Supreme Leader of Iran, and thanks for the helps of the government and nation of Iran.

The main subject of this visit, however, has to be sought in the words of the revolutionary leader, referring the major achievements of the resistance axis in Syria, warns of two major issues, and in some way consider these two as the following scenarios of the United States in the next stage:

1 The issue of the buffer zone that the Americans are seeking to create in Syria

2 Americans plan for effective presence on the border between Iraq and Syria

Everyone knows that the US decision to withdraw its troops from Syria took place following a conversation between US President Donald Trump and his Turkish counterpart, Recep Tayyip Erdo?an. The events after the talks and subsequent talks between Trump and Erdogan indicate that the US and Turkey have reached an agreement that, with the departure of US forces, the Syrian army fails to fill the gap.

The Kurds, who were relied on the support of the United States against the threats of Turkey, were suddenly seeing themselves deceived and threatened with serious threats from the Turkish military. All these issues have caused the East Euphrates and its future to be similar to the multi-dimensional equations, even in the tripartite meeting of Iran, Russia and Turkey in Sochi.

Different positions indicate that several countries are looking for a role in the buffer zone. On the other hand, Turkey wants to use it as an area for striking Kurdish forces, an issue that is unacceptable by politicians in the United States and officials from many European countries.

Nevertheless, Turkey’s main objective is to create a 32,000-kilometer-long buffer area and a width of 450,000 miles to transport nearly 50,000 military forces aligned with itself from Idlib to the eastern Euphrates.

Meanwhile, the United States wants to keep Syria and its allies from seizing the region by maintaining a number of its forces and adding NATO troops. It should also be emphasized that Trump’s interest-seeking approach has shown that he will easily leave the Syrian army as completely as possible against the Turkish army and defenseless armed insurgents.

Of course, it should be noted that some of the pressures have prevented the realization of this issue, so there are many controversial news about the withdrawal of American forces and the future of this region.

On the other hand, the United States is developing a plan in which tribal elders and community committees from Sunnis and Syrian Kurds are trained under the supervision of US forces and secure the security of the buffer zone. Donald Trump’s remarks on the gradual withdrawal from Syria and the defense of his allies in Syria can also be analyzed in this way.

Donald Trump has previously stated that “we will leave Syria during a certain period of time”, emphasizing that “America will defend its Kurdish allies on Syria”.

LEAVE A REPLY