By Eric Vandenbroeck and co-workers
Iran’s Losses Could Be Turkey’s Gains
The conflict between Iran and Israel has
set the Middle East down a path toward a slow but significant strategic shift.
Iran’s flagging influence has created an opportunity for the region’s Sunni
Arab states to tip the balance of power in their favor, but they will likely be
unable to do so. The one country that possibly can is Turkey, mired though it
is in its domestic problems. Either way, the change underway will be a long,
messy process.
As of Oct. 9, several escalatory
elements are in play. U.S. President Joe Biden is slated to speak on the phone
with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to discuss how he plans to
respond to Iran’s recent missile bombardment. This follows a last-minute
decision by Netanyahu to cancel a trip by Defense Minister Yoav Gallant to
Washington to discuss Israel’s war plans. Elsewhere, Iranian Foreign Minister
Abbas Araghchi is due to arrive in the Saudi capital of Riyadh to discuss
regional security in light of the conflict.
The Biden
administration is, of course, on its way out, and it is trying to leverage
Israel’s dependence on U.S. military aid to shape the response to Iran. Its
goal is to keep Israel from targeting Iran’s nuclear facilities and oil
infrastructure, as an attack of that kind would create even more problems for
the United States and its allies in the region. Israel simply wants Washington
to go along with as many of its plans as possible.
Regardless of how
severely Israel responds, the reality is that Iran has already sustained heavy
blows to its regional position. Its premier proxy, Hezbollah, has been
decimated, its leadership and offensive capabilities greatly degraded. It took
years for Tehran to build Hezbollah, using resources made scarce by a grueling
sanctions regime against it. The group is the foundation of Iranian power
projection capability in the Arab world, and it is central to Tehran’s plans to
create an arc of influence stretching to the Eastern Mediterranean. For its
part, Hezbollah is trying to mitigate the political fallout of the destruction
of its military capabilities. It knows it is no longer the weapon it once was,
so it needs to preserve its position at home. Iran’s other regional proxies –
its militias in Iraq and Syria and the Houthis in Yemen – are not as powerful
as Hezbollah and are no doubt considering their future, especially as Israel
plans to punish their patron.
So far, Iran has
managed to maintain a perception of power because it has yet to be hit inside
its borders. But the fact that Hezbollah is bearing the brunt of the Israeli
assault exposes the limits of Iran’s reliance on proxy warfare and likely
undermines the morale of the so-called axis of resistance. Sensing this, Iran’s
many regional competitors may be emboldened to take advantage of the situation,
which is nothing short of historic. The founding of the Islamic Republic of
Iran in 1979 – itself a consequence of post-world war Sunni fragmentation –
ushered in a new era of geosectarian rivalries that
had been dormant for centuries. Tehran had already been cultivating ties with
Shiite actors throughout the Arab world by the time the U.S. invaded Iraq in
2003. That war merely accelerated Iran’s proxy project, which enabled Tehran to
deeply penetrate the Arab world. The last time Shiites posed a major challenge
to a Sunni-majority Middle East was during the early 16th century with the rise
of the Safavid Empire. (The Ottomans were in control of Syria and Iraq at the
time, so in some ways, modern Iran has achieved what no other government has.)
Iran’s regional
strategy demanded that it block Turkey where it could. Frustrated, Turkey
watched with dismay at how Iran exploited the conflicts in the Arab world,
especially the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, to advance its ambitions and
create crises on Turkey’s southern flank. Iran’s losses in the region, then,
are Turkey’s gains. Turkey has already begun to improve its relations with
Syria after more than a decade of hostility. The Assad regime has been trying
to rehabilitate itself for years. Toward that end, it is happy to reduce its
dependence on Iran, Hezbollah and other militias, and it has every interest in
distancing itself from the Israeli-Iranian confrontation. Here is where the
interests of Ankara and Damascus converge. The only constraint Syria has in
pulling away from Iran is the fear of a revived Sunni rebellion. Israel’s
attacks on Hezbollah are likely emboldening Sunni rebel groups, but if Turkey,
which has backed them in the past, is willing to restrain these groups, then an
understanding can be reached.
Turkey and Syria also
have overlapping interests in limiting the growth of Syrian Kurdish
separatists. Syrian President Bashar Assad wants to regain control of the
territory he lost in the northeast, and Ankara wants to weaken Kurdish
separatism in Syria because it poses a threat to Turkey. Clearly, Ankara has
its work cut out for it, and Tehran will not give up without a fight.
After all, Syria is critical to Iran’s connection with
Hezbollah and key to the survival of the pro-Iranian Shiite-dominated regime in
Iraq. The presence of a Sunni Arab majority on both sides of the Syrian-Iraqi
frontier is a threat to Iranian ambitions and a potential asset for Turkey to
roll back Iranian influence in the northern rim of the Middle East.
For updates click hompage here