After a catastrophe for its axis ally Assad, Iran stands at a crossroads

Reuters / Nick Donaldson

Iran has not been able to catch a break in recent months, facing crisis after crisis, blow after blow. But even by such standards, the stunning collapse of Bashar Al Assad’s government in Syria has been a massive shock to Tehran’s system.

Iran spent tens of billions of dollars and lost more than 2,300 military personnel to keep the former Syrian president in power. Mr Al Assad’s administration represented not just Iran’s most sturdy Arab ally but a geographical lynchpin that made Tehran’s “Axis of Resistance” possible. It was through Syria’s territory that Iran supplied the jewel in the crown of the Axis: Lebanon’s Hezbollah. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi was Mr Al Assad’s last major diplomatic guest. Visiting Damascus just a few days before the Syrian government collapsed, Mr Araghchi even had dinner at a shawarma joint in the capital to show that everything was alright. The meal has now gone down in history as “the Last Supper” rather than a triumphant show of confidence.

Supporters of the Iranian government’s regional policy are in shock. Meanwhile, Iran has tried to limit the fallout by pushing the narrative that Mr Al Assad’s downfall won’t hurt Tehran much. Some are even whispering that the Syrian president lost the country because he had toyed with distancing himself from Iran. Mr Al Assad had fallen “due to many promises and pressures from the US and some Arab countries; he had cut his ties with Iran,” claimed Hamidreza Taraghi, a conservative politician.

Appearing in a closed session of parliament on Tuesday, Hossein Salami, head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, claimed that Iran remained regionally powerful and “maintained its focus on destroying the Zionists”. Mr Salami also said that Iran had withdrawn all of its forces from Syria.

Mr Araghchi himself claimed that the Axis would continue because it was primarily based on ideas that won’t die with a change of government in Damascus. Iran has also tried to maintain contact with the new administration taking shape and Mr Araghchi did not even rule out Syria remaining in the Axis. This sounds implausible given that Damascus’s new rulers seem eager to move away from Tehran. Despite significant Israeli attacks on Syrian military infrastructure, the Islamist rebel leader Ahmad Al Shara, formerly known as Abu Mohammed Al Jawlani, has not attacked Israel verbally and is adamant that, exhausted by years of war, Syrians do not want more fighting.

But beyond these attempts at damage control, what will be the lasting effect of the fall of Mr Al Assad on the Iranian government?

It is well known that many in the Iranian establishment are wary of the focus on regional militias and sabre rattling with Israel that has been central to the career of supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. These dissenters include President Masoud Pezeshkian who has tried to focus on economic development. According to well-sourced Iranian journalist Fereshteh Sadeghi, Mr Pezeshkian was opposed to Tehran aiding Mr Al Assad. Iran’s President might even be secretly relieved that Iran’s Axis policy has received a blow serious enough to strengthen his camp’s arguments: that Iran needs a diplomatic deal with the US and the West to take care of its economic problems. This means de-escalation, not entering new conflicts.

But Mr Pezeshkian and Iranian reformists are also using the fall of Mr Al Assad in a more novel way. They are suggesting that Iran must learn a cautionary lesson: reform or perish.

Mr Araghchi’s own post-Damascus interview implicitly pointed to Mr Al Assad’s lack of popular support as a reason for his political demise. “We suggested that Assad should interact more with the Syrian people since what keeps the government in power is the people,” Mr Araghchi said on Sunday. Critiquing Mr Al Assad, Mr Araghchi said his government “hadn’t showed enough flexibility and speed” in reforming itself.

Although Mr Araghchi was talking about Syria’s domestic affairs, it was not difficult for Iranians to draw inferences about their own conditions. Only a few months in office, the Pezeshkian government is fighting against a draconian hijab bill passed by Iran’s hardliner-dominated parliament. It is also trying to ease Iran’s restrictions on the internet while facing opposition from conservatives. The President’s supporters point out that if Iran does not reform fast enough, it will go the way of Syria’s fallen government.

Fatemeh Mohajerani, Mr Pezeshkian’s spokeswoman, made the point explicitly. Speaking on Sunday, Ms Mohajerani referred to Mr Pezeshkian’s slogan of forming “a government of consensus”, which is usually taken to mean a conciliatory approach toward the conservatives.

“The real consensus must be with the people,” she added. “You heard Dr Araghchi … We must talk to the people. No government can be successful without the people. We badly need support from people.”

Many other reformists are making the same point. “If Bashar Al Assad had accepted free elections,” a pro-reform Iranian doctors’ association asked on X, formerly known as Twitter, “and listened to critics instead of repressing them, what would have been the fate of himself and Syria?”

Mohammad Tavassoli, a leading figure of the Freedom Movement of Iran, called on “all the tyrannical governments” to learn from the fall of Mr Al Assad and “prevent such a costly process by a timely return to the people and building room for freedom and sovereignty of the nation”.

But the first reaction from Iran’s security authorities does not suggest that they have learned this lesson. The Ministry of Intelligence has reportedly contacted several activists, warning them against making any comparisons between Iran and Syria. Mahmoud Sadeghi, an outspoken former reformist MP, was one of those the ministry called. He disregarded the threat and wrote an article, making precisely such a comparison.

Addressing the authorities, Mr Sadeghi wrote: “We should allow political analysts to make their point if they see similarities between our approaches and behaviour and that of Assad. Instead of escaping the truth, the authorities can fix their errors.”

Even more brazenly, Mr Sadeghi took to directly addressing Mr Khamenei. Since the leader is 85 years old, the battle over his succession is already taking place. Mr Sadeghi wished him a long life but added: “If you don’t fix the problems while you are alive, I am afraid that our regime will go the path of Syria’s.”

If enough Iranian statesmen heed Mr Sadeghi’s warning, then the fall of Mr Al Assad might end up being an unlikely catalyst for reform in Iran.