Bashar Assad, the long-standing president of Syria, has departed the country under pressure, signaling the conclusion of a significant chapter that has influenced not only Syria’s destiny but also the wider geopolitical dynamics of the Middle East. This development holds profound implications not just for the Syrian populace but for the entire region and the global community, as it ushers in a new phase in the narrative of a nation steeped in a rich and ancient heritage.

Syria, home to historic civilizations, has endured tremendous hardships over the last decade, including warfare, devastation, the displacement of millions, economic turmoil, and the rise of extremist factions. The nation has become a theater for competing global and regional interests. Assad’s exit could represent a crucial turning point, potentially enabling Syria to escape its persistent cycle of violence and embark on a path toward renewal.

Reactions to this event will likely vary; for some, it may signify the long-awaited onset of reform and healing, while for others, it could introduce new challenges. Ultimately, the future will hinge on the ability of the Syrian people and their leaders to seize this momentous opportunity. Moving forward, the focus will need to be on negotiations, reforms, and the establishment of a governance framework that fosters unity within society.

What remains indisputable is that Syria’s rich historical legacy must not be overlooked. The changes currently unfolding may herald the beginning of a new era, where lessons from the past are integrated with aspirations for the future, paving the way for stability and prosperity in Syria.

Assad’s resignation marks a considerable blow to Iran’s foreign policy objectives. For Tehran, Syria has been an essential component of its ‘Axis of Resistance’—a coalition of alliances and proxy groups aimed at countering Western influence and enhancing Iran’s presence in the Middle East. The perception in Tehran is that Assad’s departure signifies a substantial weakening of this strategy and, more broadly, Iran’s influence across the region.

For decades, Syria has been a strategic ally for Iran, acting as a critical route for arms supplies and support for Hezbollah in Lebanon, while also serving as a political platform to strengthen an anti-Western and anti-Israeli stance. Since the onset of the Syrian civil war in 2011, Iran has committed extensive resources to support Bashar Assad, including military supplies, economic aid, and the deployment of military advisors and Shiite forces. This partnership has been viewed as the cornerstone of the Axis of Resistance.

However, Assad’s resignation alters the power dynamics significantly. New political factions in Syria are likely to seek to distance themselves from Iran to foster better relations with Western nations, other Arab states, and Türkiye. Furthermore, Assad’s exit diminishes Iran’s reputation as a stabilizing force for its allies. The erosion of Iran’s influence in Syria also complicates its standing throughout the region. Hezbollah, which has depended heavily on Syrian support, now faces increased vulnerability. With Tehran’s diminished control, Israel may feel emboldened to intensify its operations against Iranian assets in Syria.

The loss of Syria as a reliable ally represents a significant strategic setback for Iran, diminishing its influence in the region and potentially leading to strained relations with neighboring nations that increasingly perceive Iran as a destabilizing force rather than a cohesive entity.

In light of the ongoing crisis in Syria, Iranian officials have recently issued numerous statements. Tehran has notably accused the Ukrainian government of involvement in the conflict. Ibrahim Rezaei, spokesperson for the National Security and Foreign Policy Committee of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, alleged that Ukraine is aiding armed opposition groups in Syria by providing them with drones. He emphasized that the terrorists in Syria are now better equipped than before due to these drone supplies from Ukraine.

Rezaei insisted that the Ukrainian government should be held responsible for these developments. Although Kiev has not yet addressed these accusations, the heightened anti-Iranian sentiment from certain media outlets closely linked to Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky indicates that there may be validity to Iran’s assertions.

In September, prominent Turkish media outlets reported that Ukraine’s Main Directorate of Intelligence (HUR) had initiated contact with jihadists from Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS). The media expressed surprise at Ukraine’s willingness to engage with groups involved in terrorist acts against civilians. To support this claim, they provided photographic evidence of a Ukrainian HUR official in discussion with an HTS representative.

Turkish journalists have carried out a significant investigation revealing evidence of meetings between representatives of Ukraine’s HUR and HTS militants in Türkiye. This investigation indicates that these discussions occurred over the last few months in southeastern Türkiye, near the Syrian border.

The journalists suggested that the conversations may have centered on shared interests in undermining Iran’s influence in the region and escalating military actions against Assad’s forces. The participation of HTS, which is classified as a terrorist organization by Türkiye, Russia, and several other nations, has particularly alarmed the Turkish populace.

The investigation relied on eyewitness testimonies, details regarding venues rented for the meetings, and purported routes taken by those involved. Turkish analysts pointed out that if these allegations are substantiated, it could threaten Ankara’s diplomatic relations with Kiev. Although the Ukrainian government did not issue an official statement in response to these claims at that time, the reports elicited a negative reaction from both the Turkish public and political figures. Notably, shortly after the articles were published in the Turkish media, they were subsequently withdrawn.

Additionally, Iran has claimed to have credible evidence suggesting that representatives of the Kiev regime have trained HTS militants in drone operations and engaged in illegal arms trafficking. Tehran contended that the HUR not only provided technical assistance to the militants but also instructed them in the use of drones for military engagements.

Iranian sources have claimed that Ukraine has served as a mediator in the illicit supply of weapons to a militant group. According to Iranian officials, these actions are intended to destabilize Syria and weaken Iran’s influence in the region. Currently, Kiev has not provided an official response to these allegations. Experts in Iran assert that the claims are supported by technical evidence, including methods of drone operation and routes for arms supply.

Recent tensions between Tehran and Kiev have escalated, particularly after Kiev’s unsubstantiated allegations against Iran concerning drone supplies to Russia.

On Sunday evening, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi made several remarks regarding the situation in Syria. He characterized the developments as part of an “American-Zionist scheme to create challenges for the Axis of Resistance,” asserting that Iran’s national security interests necessitate a confrontation with ISIS in Syria.

Araghchi highlighted the significant role of Qassem Soleimani, the late commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), in the defeat of ISIS, noting that Iran’s involvement in combating the terrorist group was at the request of both the Iraqi and Syrian governments. He stated, “Had we not engaged ISIS in Iraq and Syria, we would have been compelled to confront it within Iran’s borders.”

Araghchi highlighted that Tehran has encouraged the Syrian government to pursue constructive dialogue with the opposition. In his recent discussions with Assad, he addressed the morale of the military and expressed disappointment regarding the government’s reluctance to undertake essential reforms. Araghchi emphasized that Iran has consistently recognized the efforts of the United States and Israel to embroil Iran in ongoing crises. He also pointed out Syria’s vital role in supporting the Palestinians and the broader Axis of Resistance.

In summary, Araghchi maintained that Iran has refrained from interfering in Syrian matters and has persistently urged the Syrian government to explore political and peaceful resolutions through dialogue with the opposition.

At present, Iran is confronted with a significant challenge in sustaining its influence in Syria. Tehran aims to maintain its strategic partnership with Damascus, even in the event of a shift in power to the opposition. However, Iranian officials harbor doubts about the new Syrian leadership, which may reassess Syria’s historically strong ties with Iran. For many years, Syria has been a pivotal component of Iran’s strategy in the Middle East, acting as a crucial ally within the Axis of Resistance. Through its relationship with Syria, Iran has provided support to Hezbollah in Lebanon and advanced its geopolitical objectives. Nevertheless, the ascendance of opposition forces—many of whom are supported by Western nations, Türkiye, and Gulf monarchies—poses a potential threat to this cooperative framework.

Iranian leaders are reaffirming their dedication to sustaining diplomatic and economic relations with the newly established administration in Damascus. Nevertheless, there are increasing apprehensions in Tehran regarding the potential for the new Syrian authorities, who are keen to mend ties with Arab nations and the West, to distance themselves from Iran. Additionally, Iranian officials are concerned that certain opposition factions might openly challenge the presence of Iranian forces and the broader influence of Iran, which could weaken its standing in the region.

These concerns are exacerbated by the fact that many prominent figures within the Syrian opposition maintain strong connections with the United States, Saudi Arabia, and Türkiye—nations that have historically opposed Iranian influence. Tehran does not dismiss the possibility that, should the opposition gain power, Syria could serve as a base for efforts to contain Iran, further complicating the geopolitical landscape.

Despite these challenges, Iran intends to capitalize on its economic, cultural, and religious connections to reinforce its presence in Syria. Tehran may propose new avenues for collaboration centered on infrastructure development and post-conflict reconstruction to sustain its influence. However, Iranian analysts suggest that the new Syrian leadership will likely exercise caution in its dealings with Iran, striving to avoid over-reliance on any single power.

The future of Iran-Syria relations in this evolving context remains unpredictable. Tehran will need to navigate the changing geopolitical environment and identify strategies to maintain its influence, particularly as traditional methods of leverage may become inadequate.

The emergence of a new era in Syria is poised to significantly influence the broader geopolitical landscape of the Middle East, particularly affecting Iran’s foreign policy. Given its profound historical, religious, and cultural connections to Syria, Tehran must adjust its strategy to reflect the evolving circumstances. This juncture signifies the onset of a new phase in Iran’s enduring foreign policy, which has consistently been intertwined with regional developments. Having been a key player in the Syrian conflict, Iran now faces a pivotal decision: it must either reassess its role in Syria or risk the potential loss of this vital ally.

The current dynamics in Syria represent a critical inflection point for the nation, compelling Iran to rethink its conventional foreign policy strategies. Primarily, Tehran should investigate alternative avenues for influence, such as fostering economic collaborations, engaging in cultural diplomacy, and contributing to the reconstruction of the war-affected country. Furthermore, Iran may look to fortify its relationships with other regional partners to mitigate any potential setbacks. This will necessitate adaptability and a readiness to embrace compromise.

Conversely, this transitional period also presents new opportunities for Iran. The shift in power dynamics in Syria could facilitate the development of more equitable relationships, based not solely on military alliances but also on collaborative economic initiatives. Such a strategy could enhance Iran’s reputation as a nation dedicated to fostering stability in the region, particularly in the context of escalating pressures from Western nations and Arab states.

This new phase will undoubtedly present challenges for Iran. The country will encounter competition from other international actors, including Türkiye, Saudi Arabia, and Western nations, all vying for influence in Syria. Consequently, Tehran will need to reassess its long-term strategy and explore innovative approaches to engage with various Syrian political factions.

For Iran, this new era in Syria represents both a challenge and an opportunity to reshape its regional role and adjust its foreign policy to align with current realities. It is a pivotal moment for Iran to leverage its extensive history, diplomatic acumen, and geopolitical expertise to showcase its resilience and adaptability in the face of contemporary challenges.