In the aftermath of opposition rebel groups swiftly toppling Syria’s government, Iran’s leadership is struggling to come to terms with the loss of long-time ally Bashar Assad.
Iranian officials initially downplayed the situation, describing conditions in Syria as “normal.” However, the fall of the Assad regime is likely to jeopardize Syria’s role as a lynchpin of Tehran’s regional strategy.
Syria has been a cornerstone of what Tehran describes as the “Shia Crescent,” a geopolitical vision aimed at linking Iran to its allies in Lebanon and beyond.
Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, once described Syria as the “pillar” of the “Axis of Resistance,” a network of Iranian-backed groups that oppose Israel and US influence, in the Middle East. Syria has also provided a corridor for Iranian weapons and other support to reach its proxies in Lebanon.
Assad’s family ruled Syria with an iron fist for more than 50 years, and his fall represents a devastating setback for Tehran’s vision.
Analysts argue that while Iran might continue supporting proxy groups in the region, its financial and military capacity has been significantly diminished.
Mohammad Javad Akbarin, a dissident Iranian political analyst, told DW that Tehran may now shift its strategy to maintain influence by preventing the establishment of a new, stable order in Syria.
This tactic would not be without precedent. Iran has previously supported destabilizing forces in Iraq and Afghanistan to counter US influence and project its own power. However, Tehran’s current economic struggles would limit its ability to execute such strategies on the same scale.
Iran spent billions on Assad
The cost of supporting Assad’s government has been a source of growing public frustration in Iran. In 2020, Heshmatollah Falahatpishe, a former chair of the Iranian Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, revealed in a newspaper interview that Iran had spent approximately $30 billion (ca. €28 billion) to keep Assad in power.
This support from Iran, as well as from Russia, enabled Assad to gain the upper hand in Syria’s civil war, during which he brutally suppressed opposition to his rule. Assad is accused of war crimes, including indiscriminate attacks on civilians.
In a recent post on X, the former Iranian lawmaker Bahram Parsaei emphasized that Iran’s expenditure had bypassed parliamentary approval, and asked who would repay the debts now that Assad is gone.
Widespread economic hardship in Iran has fueled resentment among the population.
Many Iranians question why their government prioritizes foreign expenditure over addressing domestic needs, such as building schools and hospitals in impoverished regions such as Sistan and Baluchistan.
Undermining Tehran’s propaganda
The fall of Assad has been met with cautious optimism by many Iranians, particularly those disillusioned with their own authoritarian government.
Reza Alijani, an Iranian political activist based in Paris, said Assad’s fall allowed for parallels to be drawn between the oppressive regimes in Damascus and Tehran.
He told DW that claims from the opposition forces in Syria, such as that they will ensure inclusive governance and make efforts to prevent chaos, could serve as potential models for Iran’s future if the Islamic Republic should one day collapse.
However, he acknowledged the challenges of transitioning from dictatorship to democracy, especially in societies marked by decades of authoritarian rule.
For years, Iranian propaganda has emphasized the success and unity of the “Axis of Resistance.” Assad’s fall undermines this narrative and could leave hardline supporters of the regime disillusioned.
Pragmatic factions within Iran’s government are reportedly concerned that the loss of Syria could inspire similar uprisings at home.
Saeed Peyvandi, an Iranian sociologist based in Paris, argued that the collapse of Assad’s regime would expose the erosion of the “social contract” between the Iranian state and its citizens.
He told DW the growing chasm between the ruling elite and the public reflected a broader crisis of legitimacy that authoritarian regimes often face.
Iran staying the course in the Middle East
Many analysts believe that Iran’s approach is unlikely to change as long as Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei remains in power.
However, some see potential parallels with historical cases of rapid political transformation.
Erfan Sabati, a London-based researcher, told DW that Iran’s current state was comparable to East Germany in the months before the fall of the Berlin Wall.
He said that authoritarian regimes often appeared unshakeable until they suddenly collapsed under the weight of public dissent and external pressures.
The recent waves of protests in Iran, including the “Woman, Life, Freedom” movement, have demonstrated a growing disconnect between the Iranian government and its people.
However, it remains to be seen whether Iran’s leadership can adapt to challenges at home and abroad, or whether it will cling to its current strategy.
Edited by: Wesley Rahn
