The geopolitical landscape of the Middle East has been reshaped by many significant events over the past few decades. However, perhaps none is as startling as the recent downfall of President Bashar al-Assad in Syria, long regarded as a cornerstone of the Axis of Resistance — a coalition of states and non-state actors opposed to Israeli occupation and imperialism. Assad’s fall was not only a major blow to the Syrian regime but also a challenge to its strategic allies, including Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas. The ensuing reactions from certain factions, particularly from Palestinian groups like Hamas, have raised uncomfortable questions about Iran’s foreign policy and its role in the broader resistance to Israeli occupation.
Syria, under Bashar al-Assad, served as a key base for Iran’s support for both Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza. Iran provided Syria, Hezbollah, and Hamas with substantial military, financial, and logistical support as part of its broader strategy to confront the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories and maintain a united front against the Zionist state. It’s within this context that the recent jubilation from Hamas over Assad’s downfall is difficult to understand.
While Iran and Syria have invested heavily in the Palestinian struggle, Hamas, historically an ally of Syria and Iran, celebrated the overthrow of its benefactor. For Iran, which poured vast resources into supporting Syria’s Assad and, by extension, Hezbollah and Hamas, this response was nothing short of bewildering. It sends a chilling message about the fleeting loyalty of some Palestinian factions to the Iranian-led resistance axis.
Such dynamics are not new, however. A similar betrayal was witnessed in 1991 when Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, in the midst of the Gulf War, chose to align himself with Saddam Hussein’s Iraq over Iran and its allies. It exposed a painful reality — that political alliances in the Middle East can shift with little regard for past alliances or the sacrifices made in the pursuit of a common goal.
Yasser Arafat’s betrayal, which came during the Gulf War, was one of the least expected, especially considering the warmth between the Palestinian leader and the Islamic Republic in the earlier years. It is well-documented that during Arafat’s visit to Iran in the early days of the Islamic Revolution, Imam Ayatollah Khomeini expressed deep admiration for his guest. In fact, it was reported that this was the only occasion when Khomeini was visibly smiling in public, a rare sight for the usually stoic leader. At that moment, the bond between Arafat and Khomeini appeared to symbolize the potential for strong, lasting solidarity between the Palestinian cause and Iran’s revolutionary ideals. Yet, in a dramatic reversal, Arafat chose to align himself with Saddam Hussein during the Gulf War, a move that left many disillusioned. This shift in allegiance highlighted the complex, often unpredictable nature of political alliances in the region, revealing that the Palestinian leadership, despite its ties to Iran, was willing to forsake that relationship when their political needs required it.
This brings us to the broader implications for Iran’s foreign policy. Iran’s allies in the Axis of Resistance — Hezbollah, Hamas, and others — have repeatedly shown that, while their long-term goal may align with Iran’s, they are quick to shift allegiances based on their changing circumstances. It raises the question: Have Iran’s sacrifices in supporting these groups been in vain?
This shifting loyalty underscores a bitter truth: the Palestinian cause, though noble, is continually exploited by regional players whose interests can diverge with little notice. As long as these groups are willing to quickly abandon their supposed allies, it seems that a resolution to the Palestinian issue, much less the long-awaited two-state solution, is no closer. In light of the strategic defeat of the Axis of Resistance and these unpredictable alliances, it is a stretch to hope for any meaningful change in the near future.
Given these complex dynamics and setbacks, it is perhaps time for Iran to rethink its foreign policy approach. For over four decades, the Islamic Republic has poured significant resources into its foreign interventions and alliances, but the recent experiences should be a signal to refocus those efforts closer to home.
At present, Iran’s domestic situation is in dire need of attention. The economic toll of Western sanctions, exacerbated by internal political dynamics, continues to cripple the country’s economy. Inflation has reached record levels, with the value of the Iranian rial plummeting by more than 80% in the past five years. Unemployment remains high, particularly among youth, and there are widespread protests against economic hardship. According to reports from international organizations, the Iranian economy contracted by around 4.5% in 2022, while inflation soared above 50%.
Perhaps most troubling of all is the growing disparity in social services, with essential sectors like healthcare and education being stretched beyond their capacity. These dire conditions demand an urgent focus on domestic reform.
To strengthen the Islamic Republic’s capacity to defend itself against external threats, such a domestic reset is paramount. Redirecting attention to economic recovery, social welfare, and strengthening the internal infrastructure could provide a new, robust foundation for the nation. Iran, as a model Islamic state, needs to focus on policies that will improve living standards and ensure sustainable growth for its citizens.
Ultimately, Iran must ask itself whether its foreign adventurism, built on shaky alliances and fleeting loyalties, is worth the ongoing strain on its domestic development. There is an urgent need to recalibrate foreign policy, focusing less on an increasingly fragile resistance axis and more on domestic stability, economic growth, and social cohesion.
The time has come for Iran to prioritize its national interests — not only for the wellbeing of its people but to ensure that it can stand resiliently in the face of external aggression. It is through strength at home that Iran will best be able to live up to its aspirations of regional leadership and global influence.