 |
| Putin with Maliki yesterday (top right) and with Khamenei in 2007 |
Emboldened by his one-on-one talks yesterday with
Russian President Vladimir Putin at his Novo-Ogaryovo
residence outside Moscow, Iran’s
emerging surrogate Nouri al-Maliki told Turkey to end her “presumptuous” verve
and keep her hands off Syria.
The Iraqi prime
minister’s blatant support of the Syrian regime came soon after he revived military
ties with Moscow (see previous
post).
Maliki said Syria was
not threatening Turkey, and Ankara should not seek NATO’s intervention.
“Turkey
is being presumptuous, you could say, as if it were taking responsibility for
solving the Syrian conflict instead of the Syrian people and wants to impose
its own solution. For this reason, the international community needs to stop Turkey
from intervening,” he told the press in moscow.
NATO
must not use protecting Turkey as a pretext to intervene in Syria, he said.
Maliki
said Iraq's position on Syria is similar to Russia’s as both countries are
calling for peaceful resolution of the conflict.
He also dismissed
charges that Iraq allowed Iran to deliver weapons to Syria through its
airspace.
“This is not true,” he told Interfax yesterday,
suggesting the claims are politically motivated.
“We have been doing random checks of aircrafts and
have not discovered any weapon aboard. We found no evidence of Iranian planes ferrying
weapons to Syria. We clearly told Syria and Iran that we allow delivery of diverse
cargo, but not weapons,” he said.
Putin
meanwhile postponed a scheduled visit to Ankara because of his “busy schedule”
this month, the Kremlin press office told RT (Russia Today).
The
Russian president’s decision to postpone the visit comes amid mounting tension
between Turkey and Syria.
Editorially,
a Syria and Iran watcher, who is a confidant of the two countries’ decision-makers,
says Tehran considers the battle for Syria the “Mother
of All Battles.”
Grounds
for Iran’s mindset, the man tells pan-Arab al-Hayat’s editor-in-chief Ghassan Charbel on
condition of anonymity, are as follows:
*** Contemplate the region in the few years preceding the Arab Spring.
Iran was in the driving seat. Its clout in Iraq was waiting in the wings for
the withdrawal of U.S. troops. Its relations with Syria were solid and titling
in its favor. Its leadership was in the saddle of the Axis of Resistance,
which stretched from Tehran to Syria, to Lebanon, and to Palestine via Jihad
and Hamas.
*** Between 2000 and 2010, Iran scored spectacular successes: the 2006 Lebanon War, the debut of Iranian missiles in Israel’s security equation, and
the Gaza War that
consolidated Iranian presence on the Palestinian scene with Sunnite and Muslim
Brotherhood-affiliated Hamas.
*** Iran became the Number One player in Lebanon after the 2005 withdrawal
of Syrian troops in the wake of Prime Minister Rafik Hariri’s assassination. From
thereon, Hezbollah became the conduit for Syrian presence in Lebanon.
*** Via Hamas and Jihad, Iran was able to abort Palestinian-Israeli
negotiations under both Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas.
*** With the U.S. pulling out of Iraq and Maliki remaining at the helm there,
the Axis of Evil came to include Baghdad, which fully espoused Iran’s Syria
policy.
*** The Arab Spring startled Iran. Hosni Mubarak’s flaccid regime was an
easier pro-American target for the Axis of Resistance. Mohamed Morsi’s election
as president of Egypt at the peak of the struggle for Syria dealt Iran a body
blow. Morsi has been unequivocal in wanting President Bashar al-Assad to step
down.
*** Iran is now running into a regional brick wall. You can call it a
Sunnite brick wall, given Morsi’s alliance with Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan and
the pair’s cooperation with Gulf Arabs, especially on the Syria file. This
reality has shuffled the rules of play in the region.
*** The Axis of Resistance has lost its sole Sunnite offshoot, Hamas,
which has moved out of Syria.
*** Iran is waging a “Mother of All Battles” in Syria in that it is
defending there its role, its borders, its investments over the years, a
crossroads, a corridor to Hezbollah, and its gains in Iraq and Lebanon.
*** Hezbollah is in a life-and-death battle in Syria. The “Party of God”
is aware it needs the Syria corridor to remain a regional player and retain the
ability to wage war or face one. Otherwise, it would metamorphose into a local
player in Lebanese politics.
*** Iran recognizes the Syrian regime’s fall and the rise of a
substitute pro-Turkey regime could create new facts on the ground in Iraq and
Lebanon. That would bring down the curtains on Iran’s role as a major player
and undermine the image of its leaders as they struggle with U.S. and European sanctions
and regional commitments.
*** It is difficult to imagine the Syrian regime returning to a status
quo ante the Arab Spring. Iran is mindful of this, but chooses to extend the
regime’s lifespan despite the costs. Such policy could turn Syria into an Arab
Afghanistan worrisome to Turkey, Israel and other states.
*** Iran is waging a “Mother of All Battles” in Syria because it cannot bear
losing two battles: the role battle and the battle for the bomb.
