Crack in the Axis: Signs of Syrian-Iranian Split?

Email

Print

Share

February 21, 2007 6:17 PM

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad ended two days of meetings in Tehran Sunday, charging that the "enemies of Islam" were engaged in "the creation of a rift among Muslims" -- an unusual admission that the strategic relationship between Iran and Syria may be fraying.

"Recent developments have led to a conflict between the priorities of Damascus and those of Tehran," according to former Jordanian information minister Saleh Al-Qallab, writing in the London daily "Al-Sharq Al-Awsat." "The cooling [of relations between Syria and Iran] is serious, and is not just a tactical [maneuver]. It will develop into a split and into severe hostility, unless Tehran finds a way to bridge [the difference] between its own priorities and those of Syria," he wrote.

A real split between the two countries, should recent tensions lead to that, would break up one of the most important and lethal strategic alliances that has supported militant organizations, such as Hamas and Hezbollah, in confrontations with Israel and challenged American policies across the board in the Middle East for the past 25 years.

The rift has been exposed by a flurry of recent diplomatic initiatives by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, aimed at preventing further escalation of Sunni-Shiite conflicts.

Once again, the flashpoint is the small country of Lebanon, which has been paralyzed for the past two months by a Syrian-inspired campaign by the Shiite party and militant organization Hezbollah to bring down the elected government of Fouad Siniora.

Click Here for Full Blotter Coverage.

At the heart of the crisis is the support by the Siniora government for the creation of a U.N.-sponsored International Tribunal to prosecute those responsible for the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri, who was killed along with 22 others by a massive truck bomb in Beirut on Feb. 14, 2005.

A report in October 2005 by the U.N. special investigator stated that the evidence indicated both Syrian and Lebanese security officials were involved in the plot. Sources close to the U.N. investigation say the current Commissioner Serge Brammertz will be prepared to file charges in the case by this summer. 

President Assad is clearly concerned that he or senior members of his government could be implicated, and he has fought hard through his political allies in Lebanon, such as Hezbollah, to block approval of the Tribunal. 

Last November, on the eve of a vote to approve the Tribunal, Hezbollah and its allies pulled its six ministers out of the government prompting the current government crises. Demanding the resignation of the Siniora government, Hezbollah organized sustained street demonstrations and strikes in central Beirut.

But the Siniora government held fast, and in January, the disturbances in Beirut became increasingly violent and threatened to spiral out of control.

The specter of a renewed civil war in Lebanon along Sunni-Shiite lines finally prompted the usually gun-shy Saudis to intervene. 

In a series of high-level discussions in Beirut, Tehran and Riyadh, which largely bypassed Damascus, the Saudis obtained Iranian support for an agreement that would end the impasse between the Siniora government and Hezbollah. The agreement would create a new Government of National Unity by increasing Hezbollah's representation in the government but would also lead to the new government's approval of the International Tribunal. 

The establishment of the Tribunal is important to Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah, who was a close friend of Mr. Hariri and, along with the current Lebanese Prime Minister Siniora and Syria's other opponents in Lebanon, is intent on seeing his killers brought to justice.

But the Tribunal is an obvious deal breaker for Syria, who has instructed Hezbollah not to accept the agreement. "Syria is intent on blocking the International Tribunal at any cost," said David Schenker, senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. "They don't care if Lebanon descends into civil war; in fact, they might view it as useful, as a way to reassert their influence there."

By going directly to Iran, Saudi negotiators bypassed Syria and appealed directly to the dominant power in the alliance and the country that controls the financing of Hezbollah.

According to Arab diplomats, Saudi Arabia and Iran share a common interest in avoiding a wider Sunni-Shiite conflict. "Iran is more savvy and more pragmatic," said Mr. Schenker. "Iran does not want civil war in Lebanon, which could further inflame Sunni-Shiite tensions and ultimately damage the Shiites. Iran wants increased political power."

Increased political power for Iran is exactly what the Saudi drafted agreement delivers by increasing the representation of Iran's client Hezbollah in the Lebanese government. The tradeoff -- effective support for the International Tribunal -- was initially accepted by Iran in mid-January following a visit by Iranian Supreme National Security Council Chairman Ali Larijani to Saudi Arabia.

On Jan. 22, Larijani traveled to Damascus and presented the Saudi draft deal to the Syrians, who predictably, rejected it.  Iran and Syria thus found themselves squarely on the opposite sides of a major political initiative.

Underlying the discrepancies on the Lebanese agreement are perhaps deeper differences of objectives and interests. Syria's primary and overriding objective is to preserve its minority Allawite regime, to eliminate any potential threats to that regime, such as the International Tribunal, and to retain a dominant interest in Lebanon, which delivers more than $2 billion a year to the cash-strapped Assad government.

Iran's primary interest is to increase and expand its influence throughout the region. For Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas provide the means of entry into the Arab-Israeli issue and the wider Middle East. 

President Assad's visit to Tehran over the past weekend was clearly aimed at salvaging the alliance, and statements issued by both sides emphasized their common interests.

Unknown at this time is whether Syrian opposition will succeed in derailing the Saudi-Iranian agreement on Lebanon. Iran and Syria continue to have deep military, intelligence, economic and political ties, and it is too early to determine if the alliance will sustain lasting damage. "There is a bit of a crack in the door," said Michael Young, columnist for Beirut's Daily Star, "but Iran is not ready to challenge Syria."

Danielle Pletka, Vice President of the American Enterprise Institute adds, "This is strictly tactical.  I don't see any change in the status quo relationship."

Still, in the view of some observers, the rift over the Saudi initiative is an indication that the two countries do have different interests that may present opportunities to resolve some longstanding conflicts in the region.