Military Review

Iran firmly supports Assad

37
For Tehran, the main thing is that Syria remains a strategic ally of Iran in the "axis of resistance" and a link with the Lebanese Hezbollah


During the current war in Syria, Iran remains a firm supporter of the regime of Bashar al-Assad. The extraordinary strength of the Iranian-Syrian alliance is even more striking when you consider that it is not based on the coincidence of national interests or common religious values: it’s rather a tactical-strategic partnership between the two authoritarian regimes. Iran and Syria became close in 1980 on the basis of a general dislike of Hussein’s Iraq, and the fear and hatred that the United States and Israel have in them contribute to maintaining the alliance.

Iran initially supported popular uprisings in the countries of the Middle East, calling them "Islamic awakening": then it seemed that the collapse threatens only the allies of the West - authoritarian regimes in Tunisia, Egypt and Yemen. During the Syrian crisis, however, Tehran unswervingly supports the Assad regime, which finds itself in a difficult situation, and stigmatizes the opposition as “terrorists” who are assisted by the diversified alliance of the Gulf countries, Israel and the United States. High-ranking Iranian politicians, such as former Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velayati, call Syria the “golden ring of resistance to Israel,” and Mehdi Taeb, one of the closest advisers to Ayatollah’s top leader Ali Khamenei, said: if we lose Syria, Tehran will not keep it either. ” Without Iran’s military and financial assistance, the Assad regime might have collapsed long ago.

This article analyzes the factors behind Iran’s support for the Assad regime, including concerns about who can replace it. The author argues that despite the economic difficulties facing Iran and the unexpected victory of the “moderate” religious leader Hassan Rouhani in the presidential election, Tehran will most likely continue to provide Assad regime with political, financial and military support.

Iran’s strategic interests in Syria are at stake

Since the Islamic revolution 1979, Syria has remained Tehran’s only consistent ally. During the Iran-Iraq war, other Arab countries supported Saddam Hussein, and even provided him with financial assistance, but the Syrian regime of Hafez al-Assad stood on the side of Iran. And although over the past thirty years, the tactical interests of Iran and Syria sometimes diverged, on macro-strategic issues both regimes most often acted in unison.

Iran firmly supports Assad

For Tehran, not only Damascus’s political support is of great importance: geographically, Syria is a bridge connecting Iran with the Shiite militarized organization Hezbollah in Lebanon, one of the “diamonds” in the crown of the Iranian revolution. Syria and Hezbollah are critical elements of the Iranian “alliance of resistance”, and much of the weapons for Hezbollah are believed to come from Iran through Damascus airport.

Iran’s desire to keep the Assad regime in power is also due to deep concern about the composition of the government after Assad. Given that the overwhelming majority of the population of Syria are Sunni Arabs, Tehran is frightened by the prospect of education in this country of a Sunni confessional regime, allied Saudi Arabia or the United States and hostile to Shiite Iran. During his visit to Damascus in August 2012, the former secretary of Iran’s Supreme Council for National Security, Saeed Jalili, said: “Iran will in no way allow the“ axis of resistance ”, one of the pillars of which, in our opinion, is Syria, whatever way is broken. " In other words, if the goal is to confront the United States and Israel, then it justifies almost any means.

Level of Iran's involvement in Syrian events

The fact that Iran plays an important role in Syria is beyond doubt, but it is impossible to accurately determine the extent of its military and financial assistance to the Assad regime. According to official data, the trade turnover between Iran and Syria is only about 700 million dollars a year - more than two times less than the volume of Iran’s trade with Afghanistan. Compared to Iranian trade with China (30 billion dollars), this figure is simply negligible. However, these statistics do not take into account the preferential prices at which Iran has been supplying Syria with oil since 1982, when Damascus agreed to close the Iraqi oil pipeline, which ran through Syrian territory.

Since the unrest began in Syria, Iranian financial support has become even more important. In January, 2013, the Syrian state media announced an agreement with Iran to open a billion-dollar credit line. Five months later, Syrian officials reported that Iran would provide Damascus another 3,6 credit line of a billion dollars "to finance gasoline and other petroleum product purchases."

In addition, Iran also offered Syria military assistance in conventional and non-traditional forms, it trains special services and cooperates with Damascus at the intelligence level to suppress popular demonstrations. From the report of the US government and Tehran’s official statements, it follows that Iran contributed to the creation of the Syrian militant organization, Jaish al-Shabi (the People’s Army), which is assisting the government forces.

As in other countries experiencing turmoil that Iran considers strategically important, for example in Iraq and Afghanistan, Tehran’s activities in Syria are not controlled by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but by an elite unit of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) known as Quds. Former Syrian Prime Minister Riyad Hijab, who fled the country, even declared: “Syria is occupied by the Iranian regime. The country is not ruled by Bashar Asad, but by Kasim Suleymani (commander of Quds). ” The US Treasury Department imposed sanctions against Suleimani and Mohsen Chizari, who is responsible for operational activities and combat training at the IRGC, because of their role in "cruel repression against the Syrian people."

It is also alleged that Iran sent to the Syrian Army ground troops of the IRGC, which have experience in suppressing popular unrest in the Iranian outback, in particular the uprisings of ethnic minorities and tribes. In August 2012, several dozen of these fighters were allegedly abducted by insurgents, and then released as part of an exchange of prisoners of war. Tehran claims that these people were pilgrims, but the facts show otherwise.

It is reported that Iran has provided Syria with assistance in building up its arsenal of chemical weapons. Iran’s support for Syrian chemical weapons work allegedly includes help from scientific personnel, equipment supplies and basic chemicals, as well as technical training from Syrian specialists.

In addition to financial and military assistance, Iran has made deliberate efforts over the past thirty years to form cultural and religious ties between the Iranian and Syrian peoples, providing its citizens with large subsidies for air travel and living expenses when traveling to Syria. In particular, millions of pilgrims from Iran visited the tomb of Said Zeinab in Damascus.

Challenges and opportunities

The main problem for Iran is the implementation of considerable amount of financial assistance to Syria under the conditions of draconian international sanctions imposed against Tehran in connection with its nuclear ambitions: because of them, Iranian oil exports have halved. According to estimates, an official from a single Arab country, Tehran, to keep Assad afloat, spends up to 600 – 700 million dollars a month. In the absence of an agreement on the nuclear issue, which, by loosening sanctions, would allow Iran to increase production and increase oil exports, the country's population, suffering from external economic pressure and incompetence of its own authorities, will increasingly be critical of Syria’s financial assistance.

In addition to financial burdens, Syria’s support turns Iran into a serious reputational loss in the Arab world, where the majority are Sunni. Just a few years ago, Shiite Iran inhabited by Persians was able to overcome this ethnic and religious divide, appealing to the indignation of ordinary Arabs by the war led by the United States led by Iraq’s coalition and the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 2006, but today Arabs Sunnis see this country as an intriguer, pursuing only their own confessional interests. The Lebanese Hezbollah is facing the same attitude because of the support of Assad.

If the Assad regime is driven out of Damascus, Tehran will face a difficult strategic choice: try to maintain its sphere of influence by supporting predominantly Alawite armed groups representing only a small minority in Syrian society, or making friends with the Sunni rebels who will take power in the capital. Contrary to the generally accepted opinion for Iran, the most important thing is not the confessional composition of the future Syrian leadership, but the ideological and ideological intimacy based on the "resistance" of the United States and Israel. As Iran’s top leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, once noted, “we will provide support and help to any people of the world, any groups fighting against the Zionist regime.” Evidence of this is the Iranian presence of Sunni allies in the person of Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. But despite the fact that Iran and some groups of Syrian rebels have common enemies, Tehran may not be able to establish friendly relations with the forces that he has helped to fight against over the past two years. Anti-Shiite, anti-Persian sentiments are widespread among Syrian rebels, and the attractiveness of Iran’s future financial assistance is reduced by the presence of richer sponsors, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

For Tehran, the main thing is that Syria remains a strategic ally of Iran in the "axis of resistance" and a link with the Lebanese Hezbollah. Since Iran’s ideal endgame — a return to the status quo, that is, the restoration of Assad’s control over the entire territory of Syria — appears to be beyond what’s possible, the main questions for Tehran today are: how long will Assad be able to keep Damascus How much help is needed for this and what happens if he loses power? According to one estimate, supplying Hezbollah through Syria, Iran will be able even if only Damascus, Homs and the coast remain under Assad’s control. And even in the case of Assad’s fall, pro-Iranian groups may be able to protect these supply routes if the opposition does not establish control over Syria’s borders.

The significance of the election of Rouhani

Iran’s alliance with the Asad family regime has existed for more than thirty years, but in the coming months the main question will be whether the unexpected election of the “moderate” cleric Hassan Rouhani as president will change Tehran’s strategy regarding Syria, or rather, does Rouhani have a political will, opportunity and interest to change Iran’s policy in the Syrian direction? In public, Rouhani expresses solidarity with the Assad regime: at a meeting with Syrian Prime Minister Wael al-Halki who arrived in Tehran, in particular, he said: “The Islamic Republic of Iran intends to strengthen relations with Syria and will support it in the face of all the challenges. No power in the world will shake ... deep strategic and historical relations between the peoples of Syria and Iran. " However, in an informal setting, a former senior assistant to Rouhani spoke out about continued support for Assad by Tehran much less categorically. According to him, the best way to eliminate the friction between the US and Iran over Syria is to find a “Syrian Karzai”: a Sunni politician whose candidacy will be acceptable to Tehran, Washington and the people of Syria.

If we cannot be sure that Rouhani wants to change Iran’s approach to relations with Syria, then it’s even harder to answer the question whether he can do it. The officials at the helm of Iran’s policy on Syria, namely the current commander of the Quds Special Forces, Qasim Suleymani, are not accountable to Rouhani: they are subject to Ayatollah Khamenei. At the same time, Syria is very important for Iran’s relations with another indispensable ally on the "axis of resistance" - Hezbollah. In this regard, according to one source in Iranian official circles, those who believe that Rouhani can do away with Iran’s patronage of Hezbollah, "... are naive or soaring in the clouds ... Whoever the president is, whoever He was ministers, Hezbollah will remain the same Hezbollah for Iran. Hezbollah is not a playing card for Iran. Today it is the “pearl” of the resistance bloc, the president’s moderation does not mean surrendering the country's positions. ”

In this context, Iran’s refusal to support the Al-Assad regime in the near future seems highly unlikely. For the political leadership of the United States, overt support for Assad by Tehran has both negative and positive consequences. On the one hand, it prolongs the life of the Syrian regime and exacerbates tensions and mutual distrust of the United States and Iran, reducing the chances of an agreement on the nuclear issue. At the same time, this support spoils Iran’s reputation among Sunnis in the region and depletes its financial resources, weakening Tehran’s ability to strengthen its power and influence in the Middle East.

Help

Karim Sajadpur - Senior Fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, author of “Understanding Khamenei: The Worldview of the Most Powerful Leader of Iran” (Reading Khamenei: The World ViewofIran's Most Powerful Leader). In 2003 – 2004, he worked as a visiting researcher at the American University of Beirut and often visited Syria.

This article was first published in the periodical of the Center for Counter-Terrorism at West Point (CTC Sentinel. - Aug. 2013: SpecialIss. - Vol. 6. - Iss. 8. - R. 11 – 13). The opinions expressed in the article express the position of the author, and not the US Military Academy, the Department of Land Forces, or another government department of the United States.
Author:
37 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. svp67
    svp67 12 September 2013 07: 44 New
    20
    Iran firmly supports Assad
    But Iran simply has no choice - if Syria falls today, then tomorrow all this “shobla” will “plumply” “deal” with Iran. So that Syria for Iran, the same as for the USSR was Spain ...
    1. xetai9977
      xetai9977 12 September 2013 07: 55 New
      21
      It's not about “unshakable” friendship. Iran simply supported Syria in the 80s to the peak of Iraq, with which it fought. Then he used Syria as a bridgehead to support Hezbollah to fight Israel. And now Syria is the last frontier of defense for Iran, the fall of which will put them face to face with the US-Israel alliance. There is no place for sentiment in modern politics, only pragmatism and nothing more.
      1. washi
        washi 12 September 2013 12: 14 New
        0
        Quote: xetai9977
        It's not about “unshakable” friendship. Iran simply supported Syria in the 80s to the peak of Iraq, with which it fought. Then he used Syria as a bridgehead to support Hezbollah to fight Israel. And now Syria is the last frontier of defense for Iran, the fall of which will put them face to face with the US-Israel alliance. There is no place for sentiment in modern politics, only pragmatism and nothing more.

        But will Iran fight for Syria in the event of an attack on it? And how will Azerbaijan behave, given the territory of Iran inhabited by Azerbaijanis (and even grab a piece of the Caspian)?
        1. xetai9977
          xetai9977 12 September 2013 12: 35 New
          +5
          Vasya It is unlikely that Iran will declare war on the West when it strikes Syria. Rather, it will be limited to a couple of acts of sabotage. And Syria is neither cold nor hot for Azerbaijan. If you mean Iran, then we don’t need to grab something, on the contrary, Iran is stirring up water in the Caspian, contrasting itself with the alliance of Azerbaijan, Russia and Kazakhstan, demanding 20% ​​of the shelf, without any reason for it.
          1. Patriot.ru.
            Patriot.ru. 12 September 2013 21: 43 New
            0
            I think Iran is against the partition of the Caspian at our request. There is no partition, there are no pipelines from Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan to Europe, bypassing Russia.
        2. Djozz
          Djozz 12 September 2013 17: 50 New
          -1
          Azerbaijan must first deal with Karabakh, and only then climb into this swara.
          1. xetai9977
            xetai9977 12 September 2013 17: 57 New
            +3
            And why does Azerbaijan need to get into a mess? We have enough of our problems.
        3. aksakal
          aksakal 12 September 2013 22: 08 New
          0
          Quote: Vasya
          Will Iran fight for Syria in case of attack on it?
          - Sorry, but where is Iran from a submarine?
    2. LaGlobal
      LaGlobal 12 September 2013 09: 20 New
      0
      Quote: svp67
      But Iran just has no choice


      Sergey, here I am about the same!
    3. MG42
      MG42 12 September 2013 10: 34 New
      +3
      Quote: svp67
      But Iran just has no choice

      Iran is in a slightly better position after the end of the Iran - Iraq war in 1988 no one attacked it, and even more likely for it to have a coalition even China can subscribe, there is no direct interest in oil for all states to take the oil without any channels flows in the Middle East are under control, as for Russia, cooperation with nuclear energy is developed with Iran.
      By the way, a curious story was how the states threw Ukraine out of the Iranian market, the turbine was already ready for Iran, Madeleine Albright the old granny outplayed the Ukrainian near-minded politicians ..
      1. APASUS
        APASUS 12 September 2013 21: 36 New
        0
        Quote: MG42
        By the way, a curious story was how the states threw Ukraine out of the Iranian market, the turbine was already ready for Iran, Madeleine Albright the old granny outplayed the Ukrainian near-minded politicians ..

        Here's a more detailed please. And then I missed something with the turbine ......
        1. MG42
          MG42 12 September 2013 21: 45 New
          +3
          Quote: APASUS
          Here's a more detailed please. And then I missed something with the turbine


          On the eve of the official visit to Ukraine by US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright in March 1998 in Kiev, it was decided to terminate the participation of Turboatom in the project. Confidential written guarantees that Ukraine will refuse to participate in the Bushehr project were received by the American side before the start of the visit. Among American ministries and departments, the corresponding obligation of Ukraine was distributed in the form of two confidential telegrams of the US Embassy in Ukraine No. 2366 and No. 23678. The decision was officially announced by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine G.I. Udovenko following a seven-hour visit by the US Secretary of State to Kiev. For the practical implementation of the decision, the Ukrainian leadership used an administrative resource. President of Ukraine L.D. Kuchma, bypassing the formalities, personally instructed the management of OJSC Turboatom to terminate cooperation with Russian companies in the framework of the project for the construction of the Bushehr nuclear power plant.

          In exchange, Ukraine was promised support for its entry into the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), the conclusion of a US-Ukraine agreement on cooperation in the field of atomic energy (Agreement 123), as well as a promise to assist in attracting private American business investment in the industry of Kharkov region, where The Turboatom enterprise is located (through the establishment of the so-called Kharkov Initiative). Also, Ukraine was promised participation in American space programs; as part of Madeleine Albright’s visit to Kiev, an intergovernmental agreement was signed.

          Another indirect argument in favor of Ukraine’s leadership deciding not to participate in the Bushehr job was the expectation of the next tranche of US economic assistance. In the spring of 1998, it was planned to receive the second part of the assistance package in the amount of $ 100 million (the total amount of the package is $ 225 million). However, in the winter of 1998 its payment was frozen, although this issue was not directly linked to the participation of Ukraine in the construction of the Bushehr nuclear power plant. Soon after the visit of the US Secretary of State to Ukraine, funds arrived in Kiev.

          The refusal of Ukraine from any contacts with Iran in the nuclear field was put forward by the United States as a condition for concluding a Ukrainian-American Agreement on cooperation in the field of nuclear energy. Agreement 123 was initialed during Madeleine Albright’s visit to Kiev and in May 1998 was submitted to the US Congress.


          http://sajjadi.livejournal.com/44117.html
          1. GREAT RUSSIA
            GREAT RUSSIA 12 September 2013 21: 51 New
            +1
            Now, I understand, thank you, dear.
          2. APASUS
            APASUS 13 September 2013 19: 19 New
            0
            Quote: MG42
            http://sajjadi.livejournal.com/44117.html

            Well, thank you!
    4. Ruslan_F38
      Ruslan_F38 12 September 2013 11: 19 New
      +3
      "The best way to eliminate friction between the US and Iran over Syria is to find a" Syrian Karzai ": a Sunni politician whose candidacy will be acceptable to Tehran, Washington, and the people of Syria."
      - the fall of Syria with Assad is unacceptable and fatal for Iran. If Rouhani changes the approach in Iran’s relations with Syria and makes concessions, Assad will "merge" Iran - the end. Everyone who tried to pursue a moderate policy in relations with the United States sooner or later ended up poorly. Full of examples.
  2. Bykov.
    Bykov. 12 September 2013 07: 44 New
    +5
    ... Iran unshakably supports Assad ...


    Because it’s perfectly clear who is next. Iran certainly needs to rest no less than Syria.
  3. tronin.maxim
    tronin.maxim 12 September 2013 07: 48 New
    +4
    It is vital for Iran to defend Syria, otherwise it will be next. What surprises me most is China, which seems to help, but it seems to be on the sidelines. Apparently, China wants to solve this problem at the hands of its allies. China’s cunning wisdom will not last long, the more China is inactive, the more difficult it will be in the future.
    1. Ruslan_F38
      Ruslan_F38 12 September 2013 11: 27 New
      0
      Quote: tronin.maxim
      What surprises me most is China, which seems to help, but it seems to be on the sidelines. Apparently, China wants to solve this problem at the hands of its allies. China’s cunning wisdom will not last long, the more China is inactive, the more difficult it will be in the future.

      That is, if China behaved at least as actively as Russia in this conflict, I think the United States would have "earned" a serious problem that would have to be solved at the negotiating table, and not with the help of a fleet at sea and tomahawks.
  4. Valery Neonov
    Valery Neonov 12 September 2013 07: 58 New
    +1
    "Iran will by no means allow the" axis of resistance ", one of the pillars of which, in our opinion, is Syria, was broken in any way."- and therefore Russia needs to strengthen relations with Iran. hi
    And in Turkey, unrest continues; how much is left before the civil war, who knows ...
  5. left-wing
    left-wing 12 September 2013 07: 59 New
    +1
    Iran Syria has the last frontier ...
    1. Asgard
      Asgard 12 September 2013 09: 44 New
      +2
      By the way, as for Us.
      Like all People on planet Earth.

      But this is our mistake ...
      We defend ourselves and WAIT for the attack, that is, the initiative of the "enemies"
      but it is necessary to attack, so fewer people will suffer ....
      it is an axiom.


      Therefore, let us recall the old thesis ..."Anarchy is the Mother of Order" ....
      What is he talking about?

      Each person is self-sufficient. He is a unit (including combat)))
      This is well understood by the Russian people, so reluctantly unites in all kinds of resistance movements, support of the authorities, parties and sects ....
      Although they are carefully driving us there ????
      Even here on the pages of the Military Review I read such appeals from respected People.
      This is of course from a misunderstanding and as a result of zombies "old broom")))
      Remember how the father broke branches and when they were folded into a "broom" it became difficult to break them ..... Here the "enemies" of course tried to invent an image)))

      Which is not in Nature?!?!Well, do not use brooms there)))))
      There in the herd (party)) are combined WEAKLY "animals". it’s really easier to survive, all kinds of jackals (attack)), fearful fallow deer, gophers))))
      But the bear, tiger, eagle prefer an individual approach and they are greatly "respected" in nature ........ WHY?
      Because they are "People" in the company of animals and they will never let themselves command a gopher or "slave in the galleys" ...
      They understand that the interests here are different, and the CHANCE is great to die (what happens to us like Rod))))
      Understand that there is no such thing as PEOPLE (nation))) this is the "UNBROKEN old broom"
      there is a genus of people consisting of individuals who are guided only by their conscience and understanding .....
      If there is no mutual understanding, destroy the "entities" that look like humans (but essentially are not)))
      Do not obey anyone, do something every day in accordance with your conscience and inner understanding of the world, they will tell you how bad you are, let's say to us in the herd, together they say We will achieve more))))

      But we don’t need more! If only there was no War ......


      P / S ...BUT IT WILL BEbecause People have not yet forged in the crucible of survival ...
      Now this is a comfortable extinction, with a "slight" overstatement of housing and communal services tariffs, noisy loans, GMO shops, under-education, parties and fronts, an imitation of the authorities, something is being done))))
      Therefore, do not what you are told, but what you really need in accordance with YOUR desires. This is ANARCHY ....
      She is our Mother, and the mother does not wish and will not do bad for her children))))))

  6. Anatole Klim
    Anatole Klim 12 September 2013 08: 03 New
    +2
    Iran, first of all, needs to gain time. Thousands of centrifuges spin around the clock, enriching uranium. And with the bomb, a completely different alignment.
  7. a52333
    a52333 12 September 2013 08: 13 New
    0
    On Saturday, 7 of September, the army of the Syrian government liberated the Christian city of Maalul from the militants, located north of Damascus. Military personnel have occupied the city center and are chasing militants on its outskirts.
    RT freelance correspondent Ibrahim Issa was injured by a fragment of a mortar shell when filming a plot at the scene of the fighting.
  8. 31231
    31231 12 September 2013 08: 20 New
    0
    I read half. It was inspired by the author from Western countries.
    He looked, indeed, the "orientalist" from the Carnegie Endowment.
    The active phase of the opposition’s struggle began when Iran signed an agreement with Syria to lay a gas pipeline to the Mediterranean. Of course, the Sauditas and Qatar fed them financially and are now fed financially. For they do not want a competitor in the European hydrocarbon market.
    1. eplewke
      eplewke 12 September 2013 11: 47 New
      0
      Yes! For Iran, the question of survival of themselves rested in the Syrian regime. There is no Syria, the question of the fall of Iran is a matter of time ... And all this riffraff is oppositional with human rights and freedom, just a screen of that economic background dragged by the Saudis and Qatar ...
  9. vlad.svargin
    vlad.svargin 12 September 2013 08: 47 New
    +4
    Contrary to popular belief, the most important thing for Iran is not the confessional composition of the future Syrian leadership, but the ideological and worldview closeness based on the "resistance" of the USA and Israel. As the supreme leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, once remarked, "we will provide support and assistance to any people of the world, any groups fighting against the Zionist regime."


    Of course, an article with a “Western darling”, but this quote, I think, is true. And Iran should be supported in this. Managed chaos in the Middle East is created by Israel and the United States, which seek to create the conditions for a "new world order" planned by their "masters."
  10. King
    King 12 September 2013 09: 32 New
    +5
    Not only for Syria is Iran the last frontier but also for Russia Syria is the penultimate one. we lose Syria we lose and the Caucasus
  11. mirag2
    mirag2 12 September 2013 09: 52 New
    0
    If Iran has nuclear weapons + SD, then I can make a prediction: in Iran, the Americans will test hypersonic missiles in action. They will deliver a preemptive strike with hypersonic missiles at the mines, or whatever else they have. For where their missile installations from the satellite can be seen, as from the windows of the house. And if that’s all, then you need to take an ax and go to the taiga. Or share oil. Or, like the Syrians get up with your human shield. Or, like under Yeltsin, let in external control.
    No, no, no! Rather, it’s necessary to create rocket trains! Here’s Kudrin, a bastard and a bastard! I didn’t give money to them at one time. I recently saw his press conference. I showed my liberalistic laughter .- "... and I warned ... and then the experts already knew ... and I said ... "
    filthy.
    1. Selevc
      Selevc 12 September 2013 10: 24 New
      +1
      But even the Americans themselves have said many times that it is impossible to solve the Iran’s nuclear problem without the land phase of the operation !!! What's the point of an air strike then? This is a half-hearted solution to the question that will not really give anything !!!
  12. svskor80
    svskor80 12 September 2013 09: 55 New
    +1
    It has always been like this: it’s better to help a neighbor put out a fire than to fight the fire in your house later. Iran should fear that after the fall of Syria, the entire "opposition" rabble will rush to Iran. As for the states and Israel, it seems to me that there is no direct relationship between Syria and then Iran. It will be necessary - they will strike at Iran no matter what, and they will find dozens of reasons, in general, like a bully gopnik at school, if you are not ready to give him a nose, then be ready to give him money for ice cream, and it is not known who will take it from the first one .
  13. mirag2
    mirag2 12 September 2013 10: 02 New
    +1
    Well, that "we lose Syria, we lose and the Caucasus" is this we understand, but what needs to be done? What do you think? Except for "wetting reptiles with the Syrians on foreign territory of nuclear weapons"?
    1. Vlad 1965
      Vlad 1965 12 September 2013 11: 38 New
      +4
      mirag2
      If you do not soak the bearded crazy in Syria, then where will this pack stop?
      Inevitably rolls like a snowball in our direction.
      And if so, then it is better to provide all assistance to Syria, so that the Syrians grind this gangster trash there, on distant approaches.
      One thing is bad, everyone understands that the States, their Qatari and Saudi satellites, Israel, are interested in the conflict, the question is, how long will these rats feel like they can intervene at the level of influence on geopolitics?
      Well, isn’t it funny, the spit on the map-Qatar allows itself to yell at Russia7
      Or medieval senility like the Saudis, imagined something about themselves?
      Once in these deserted rats, the focus was successful, with the collapse of oil prices, so what to expect a repeat?
      For me, it should be, with the help of Iran, in the event of an attack on Syria, to immediately enter the collapse of oil in Qatar and Saudi desalination fields, they are immediately provided with collapse, and not only to them, but also to Europe, which receives energy resources from there.
      But for this, WILL and Strength are needed, but with this, it’s not very good.
  14. nod739
    nod739 12 September 2013 11: 32 New
    0
    yesterday in Russia 24 an interesting program was: Geoeconomics with Kareevsky
    highly competent people talked about Syria
    here found:
    repeat
    http://www.vesti.ru/only_video.html?vid=536558
    chewed up to banalities with an excursion into the 20th century, and those who have what interests
  15. ed65b
    ed65b 12 September 2013 11: 57 New
    +1
    The fall of Syria is primarily destructive to Syria itself and its peoples.
  16. nod739
    nod739 12 September 2013 12: 45 New
    -1
    Quote: Asgard
    There in the herds (parties)) WEAK "animals" are combined. it's really easier to survive, all kinds of jackals (attack)), shy fallow deer, gophers))))
    But the bear, tiger, eagle prefer an individual approach and they are greatly "respected" in nature ........ WHY?
    Because they are "People" in the company of animals and they will never let themselves command a gopher or "slave in the galleys" ...
  17. alone
    alone 12 September 2013 19: 25 New
    +1
    Today, the fate of Iran as a player in the Middle East is being decided in Syria. In addition to Syria and Hezbollah, Iran has no allies in the region. The fall of the Assad will lead to the fall of Hezbollah. That is why Iran will stand to the end in this matter. It simply has no other choice.

    and as for the next Iran after Syria, it is possible. And the Syrian version is also possible here, only unlike Syria in Iran they can play an ethnic card. (Iranian population is 98% of the Shiites of the Jafarii movement, so the religious option is excluded). and ethnically, representatives of many peoples live in Iran. and there are enough problems in relations between peoples. and as we know, they always hit a weak point.
    1. GREAT RUSSIA
      GREAT RUSSIA 12 September 2013 20: 05 New
      0
      Quote: lonely
      but as we know they always hit a weak point.

      Yes, and our country felt it in its own way in the 90s, when, with the help of ethnic hatred, the greatest power in the history of mankind-the USSR was destroyed. But Iran and its leadership are not so stupid, I think they have already taken the lessons of history and will do all that it wouldn’t happen to them. But you should not run ahead, Syria is still holding on (and GOD let it stand to the end). Therefore, if Syria does not fall, then grabbing Iran will be premature.
      1. alone
        alone 12 September 2013 22: 57 New
        +1
        Quote: GREAT RUSSIA
        . But Iran and its leadership are not so stupid, I think they have already taken the lessons of history and will do everything to prevent this from happening.


        It's not about stupidity. And in Iran’s internal politics. And there are just some clues there that you can use
  18. tomev
    tomev 12 September 2013 20: 00 New
    +1
    Iran needs to make "dirty bombs" and during a missile strike on Syria, it is better to strike at Israel and Turkey from the territory of Syria itself. And in Saudi Arabia, Iraq to strike at wells, storage facilities, oil and gas plants
    1. GREAT RUSSIA
      GREAT RUSSIA 12 September 2013 20: 23 New
      0
      Dear with fantasy, you are not so hot. And how do you imagine this? You know how many planes in Turkey alone, there are 880 of them, add Israel. Israel has one of the most powerful aviation in the world. Also, add US aircraft carriers to the Persian Gulf, the Mediterranean Sea, and then the number of aircraft will exceed 2000. This It’s profitable for the United States, because they will quickly destroy Iran (especially together with Turkey, Israel, Saudi Arabia, i.e. they will be very strong allies, unlike the case with Syria). Iran simply does not have enough physical or material resources. But I want to note the idea was good! For such a fantasy it’s not a sin to put +.
    2. alone
      alone 12 September 2013 22: 59 New
      +1
      after that, all these countries, together with fifty others, will strike so hard that there will be nothing left in Iran except stone and sand. and the whole world will be filled with millions of Iranian citizens fleeing the slaughter
  19. 1goose3
    1goose3 12 September 2013 22: 26 New
    0
    Quote: svp67
    But Iran simply has no choice - if Syria falls today, then tomorrow all this “shobla” will “plumply” “deal” with Iran.


    Having finished with Iran, this “shobla” will be closely engaged in Russia. So we also have no particular choice. Russia supports Syria rightly and unequivocally, so far for us and Iran along the way. sad
  20. Sirs
    Sirs 13 September 2013 02: 44 New
    +1
    It's over - I'm sorry Amers and Israel, they do not understand that the truth is not on their side. They finally arrive schizophrenically in the dreams of super-lordship, who is in the world and who is in the region.