Hello I'm Waqar Rizvi and this is Scope. Well,
attacks on the Syrian province of Idlib
continue. The province is technically a demilitarized zone,
however, around three million people that have been living there are under attack currently by the Syrian regime as well as
Russian forces. This according to reports that we've been receiving here at Indus News over the past week or so.
Now this of course comes after Tahrir
al-Sham,
which is dominated by members of a former al-Qaeda affiliate, have not been holding on to their end of the bargain and have not
vacated areas that they were supposed to.
And hence leading to these attacks in Idlib at this time. On top of that, there is also the Iranian role in Syria.
What is the Iranian role going forward
considering its tug-of-war now with Russia over issues such as
reconstruction and over Israeli interests as well as Turkish interests, as well.
alright
so Hadi
I wanted to get your thoughts than on what's happening in Syria from the Iranian point of view because
the Iranians have also obviously been involved in Syria for a while now.
What do you make of Iran's stances in Syria, even when it comes to for example areas such as Idlib in that country.
Actually,
first off we have to consider the fact that
on the ground at least
Iranian factions in Syria are not very active right now in the North Western Front in Syria.
And I actually think that the current
Idlib operation that is happening is mostly
so they can actually
move away the
HTS and other
groups from the Demilitarized Zone because they have been attacking the Hmeimim base,
the Russian air base in Syria, for a long time now.
The thing is Iran actually prefers Russia to help retake Idlib.
I'm not going to go into details on how difficult and how very pre-cautious it is.
But I don't really see how this actual operation is connected to Iran.
It's mostly was Russia in my opinion.
Okay, so then is that a sign Hadi on the limits of
Iranian influence in Syria. Because you know, there is seemingly Hadi at least now a growing
conversation about a possible tug of war between Iran and Russia.
Is there any comparison do you think Hadi between Iran's involvement in Syria and Russian involvement in Syria?
Actually, yeah, because
you have to consider that to Russia
it doesn't shares all the objectiveness.
It's not the same for Iran either in Syria. First off the Russians have been,
they have,
let's say, in regards to the Iranian presence in the Golan or near the Golan and near Israel
they have been on the Israeli side and they
haven't really tried to do anything to stop Israel from attacking the Iranian forces. And also on the economic side, Russia actually
has invested heavily
I think more than Iran on the Syria campaign.
And I think they are more aggressive in trying to secure
economic,
let's say prizes, that Syria could have for them right now for the reconstruction process in Syria.
There will be a conflict of interest. It''s gonna just get worse from now on.
Heikko, what do you make of that tug of war than between Russia and Iran,. You know,
Iran would argue at its end
I'm sure that it has sacrificed a lot to keep Assad in power and to support the fight
"against terrorism." Iran has even provided more than $7 billion
in credits to Syria since the war erupted, essentially saving
Assad from financial ruin. What do you make of that?
Yeah, I mean I'm not so sure
whether how much credit I want to give to that idea of a tug of war. I mean there are different interests,
that's true and and my colleague Tehran mentioned the Golan and mentioned Israel. Well, of course, I mean that's very clear.
There is on the other hand a clear overlap of interest. So both Iran and Russia have
invested heavily,
heavily in,
 
Syria, treasure and and lives as well.
So, and I don't think any of them would want that that investment to
just go for naught and I don't think I need any one of them would
jeopardize that investment by getting into a fight with
the other, I mean as long as the overall crisis isn't resolved both want to
rehabilitate, to re-legitimize
the Assad regime, that's quite clear. So I
suspect, or I believe with all the
differences that may exist, the overlap is
still large,  the sharing. And let's not forget. Iran is beleaguered.
Iran is really really needs friends at this point in time. It would be pretty foolish to gamble with that.
Okay. So let's add another voice to the conversation. We are now joined by Mr. Flores who the Director
for the Center for Syncretic Studies. He's the editor in chief also for Fort Russ News.
He's joining us now from Belgrade, Joaquin,
thanks for joining us here in scope. Joaquin do you think that there is a tug of war between Russia and Iran
when it comes to their specific interests in Syria. The estimates for reconstruction
for example in that country run upwards of  $350 billion according to some estimates.
That's a lot of money. It is a lot of money. I know that there is a tug of war
narrative that we  find across across media, and of course across
professional
analysis of these events. I think that the total cost of the war
should also be understood in terms of the human cost.
There have been hundreds of thousands of people who have been killed. There have been many millions of
internally displaced. There have been
countless tens and hundreds of thousands of soldiers as well who have laid their lives on the line and have sacrificed
to keep Syria as an integral and whole country under a legitimate government, that is still
recognized by the UN and has legitimacy in the eyes of the
international community by and large and by countries which represent the majority of the world's
population. And so I think that
speaking in terms of a tug of war
is not splitting hairs, of course, but it's perhaps missing the point that many of these countries
involved in this conflict now, on what is increasingly and apparently the
victorious side, if we can call it such, are interested in a growing
multipolarity and actually integrating these economies and in fact
looking at development projects in terms of win-win. And so I think that the tug-of-war
narrative is a little bit looking at things in terms of what's known as positional bargaining.
And I think that position bargaining of course at times
rears its head. And positional bargaining of course at times
can be the under girding of the finer points of detail.
But what we're looking at by and large, of course is a larger development program to build super highways
that would connect
the global economy as it is emerging via land routes and these would go through Iraq and through Syria.
If I may interrupt you for a moment Joaquin because I wanted to
put this in the middle of all this. The Israel factor is an important one, isn't it? Because it does seem like Russia
respects to an extent, if I may use that term,
Israel's interests vis-à-vis Syria and vis-à-vis Israel's concerns over
Iran being too close to what Israel would see as its borders. That's certainly a very important factor in in that
perceived tug-of-war, isn't it?
Well, certainly,
Israel is a country that exists in the region and they have
their own
interests, as well and they have significant influence upon a number of
governments in the world. And so the question arises is,
does Israel have a seat at the table?
Yes, they do. And then the question arises, at which table will they sit? And so if one were to begin
with a prior position that Israel
cannot speak or Israel has no position at all to recognize,
then that only places them with the alternative of turning to the United States
to reinforce their position and I think that the history of the last
two decades in this region has shown that all of the United States moves have been quite disastrous and have been
against stability and against economic and social growth in all spheres,
And so if Russia is acting as a moderating factor on
Israel's otherwise behavior, then I think that might be a positive thing. Very interesting point of view Joaquin.
Let me put that to Hadi in Tehran. Hadi, do you agree with Joaquin's point of view there?
Do you think Iran sees Russia as somebody who is who is mediating in some ways the Israeli
interests when it comes to Syria.Because it seems like
according to some estimates again Hadi, and I could be wrong on this, you can correct me,
but it seems that Russia has given free hand to Israel to attack
Iranian interests in Syria. Do you agree with that Hadi?
There has been some...
If you look at the history of the Israeli attacks in Syria, I don't really remember that exact number
but it was over over 100 - more than that. I don't
remember exactly the amount of times, the amount of airstrikes that Israel has carried on Iranian targets in Syria.
All the while that Russian forces have been present in those same areas and have decided to look the other way.
And
that's actually giving a killing light to.. that's actually going more to the Israeli side of a
spectrum from the Russian side then actually the Iranian. So there has been talks here in Iran and there have been
complaints from Iranian officials, mostly military and the IRGC,
about this.
Let's say
Russia understands in Syria because they have given free hand to Israel and not once they have tried to stop them.
It doesn't really seem to me that at least from the Iranian viewpoint that they are mediating or
let's say
confronting the Israelis... Not confronting, but at least
asking them not to attack or
refrain from attacking because that doesn't seem the case. Heiko
what are your thoughts..
What do you make of the Israel factor in the middle of all this?
Well, I mean, you should ask the Israelis
directly what they want in Syria, but if you want to make a guess,
I would think that they would really like to go back to
pre-2011, you know and have a stable authoritarian regime that
thinks better of
making trouble at the border and tries to bring investment and to build like its own oligarchic interests,
there you know. So...
from the Iranian perspective, I think the
interesting part is to
actually use
Syria as they are using Lebanon, as a card of deterrence.
So,
Israel can attack Iran. It is where it has the means to attack Iran with missile with the air force.
The Israeli's of course don't want to do that,
they prefer that the Americans do that but option do exist. The Iranians don't have these means
themselves but they can do it to their allies and proxies from Lebanon. And I think they wouldn't mind having that same option in Syria.
It's useful to have two theaters, Lebanon and Syria, with different rules so they can play different games.
So from the Iranian perspective, that's all
advantages and assets in the current
confrontation. And they're in with the US and they
believe, I think accurately, that the US and Israel at this point in time
are pretty much the same thing or two side of the same coin.
And this is clearly not in the interest of the Russians. The Russians also would like to go back to the pre-2011
situation and you go to Moscow, you hear that, they're very nostalgic about the
old times, the old dictators, that would do as they were told, that were reliable.
They were rational, and all of this. But I'm not sure there is a way back there, really.
Joaquin, I wonder what you make of
Iranian Foreign Ministers visit to Moscow. Obviously
most of those talks at least public statements were mostly of course about a nuclear deal itself and Iran's warning and
deadlines for 60 days. The Russians placing the blame squarely back on the Americans.
But I wonder you know while the Russians and Iranians do agree when it comes to the nuclear deal,
these other areas such as Syria can can really muddy the waters, can't they? I
think they can.
When I look at the events in Syria
And who had an interest in
a stable Syria,
I don't include Israel in that list of countries that looks back fondly on the
pre-2011 days. In fact, I wonder and I questioned
the integrity
and thoughtfulness of such claims
which really I think fly in the face of reason, the historical record. The open and admitted support that
Israel has given both medical and supplies to the most radicalized WAHHABI
elements of fighting,
actually. Al-Qaeda, al-Nusra and ISIS units, which the
Israeli Medical Teams have evacuated, have supported, have supplied,
and this is entirely contrary to any narrative
that Israel would
prefer
the government of Assad and I think that this
regime discourse is also very toxic because all of these countries are
recognized at the level of the UN making them NOT regimes but governments which are
duly respected and it exists within the accordance of international law.
So now I think that in terms of muddying the waters on Syria, every country involved in this conflict, of course as
operating along the lines of its own national and international interests,
which is seeking to forge,
and of course at these
times these alliances appear to be shifting or they can shift if one actor begins to behave in a way that is either
predictable or
unpredictably unstable.
So I think that really the the X-factor in this conflict so far has been
that Israel is triangulating in a very serious and successful way, to a large extent.
But I don't think that fundamentally
Iran and Russia have conflicting aims in Syria.
It's really a question of letting and allowing
Israeli leadership to save face and to not feel and so that investors and military and other
connected consortia, can feel safe in the hands of a Russian mediating force.
All right, I believe time has gotten the best of us. We're gonna leave it there as our final word
That was you Joaquin Flores, director of the Center for Syncretic Studies and also editor-in-chief at Fort Russ News.
He was speaking to us from Belgrade. We were also joined. Mr
Haidi who is a political analyst. He was speaking to us from the Iranian capital, Tehran. And finally we were joined by
Heiko who is with the International Crisis Group. He is their project director for Iraq,
Syria and Lebanon, he was speaking to us from the Lebanese
capital. Now viewers, as all three of our guests are spoke about this tug of war narrative between Russia and Iran,
it may very well be
overstated. However,
their conflicting interest or their different interests more accurately are now coming to the fore ever more
so now in these coming days.
Considering of course Russia does stand by Israel, more of course than Iran.
Yet the Russians are standing by Iran when it comes to the nuclear deal.
So this is a bit of a maze, a bit of myriad of conflicting interests and different
players external players there in Syria. And we haven't even spoken about Turkey yet amongst all of this.
We'll keep a close eye on how that situation develops, as well of course the situation in Idlib,
which remains at this point in time, a major unresolved issue in Syria. I'll be back with our next segment after the short break.
