How Obama's Iran Policy Strengthened Hezbollah: The Syrian Conflict And Regional Balance Of Power
31 December 2017By Dr. Azeem Ibrahim
As the dust begins to settle on the mess that is Syria, certain facts have
become evident. One of the most significant for the long term prospects of the
Middle East is the fact that Hezbollah has emerged as one of the most powerful
forces in the region.
This outcome was preventable. But political choices made by the Obama
administration have made it real. The history of Hezbollah is long and
bloodied. For most of that history, however, the 'Party of Allah' was little
more than a normal militia with a penchant for terrorist tactics.
It did cast a long shadow over the region, but it did so in much the same way
that Hamas does. They were both influential groups in relatively small but
highly volatile conflicts which could have spill over effects into the wider
region.
Lebanon, the home of Hezbollah, is a small place with peculiar politics, but
the ongoing power struggle between the various opposing factions in the
country is taken as a bellwether for the wider sectarian conflicts in the
region.
And for good reason: most of these factions are sponsored by opposing powers
in the 'Concert of the Middle East'. Hezbollah was the local Iranian proxy. It
largely served the geopolitical interests of Iran in Lebanon, and sometimes,
used to project Iranian pressure over the border in Israel - with various
degrees of success.
Lebanon is a small place with peculiar politics, but its power struggle is
taken as a bellwether for the wider sectarian conflicts in the region
The Syrian conflict
In the Syrian conflict, Hezbollah started out in much the same way: as the
local enforcer of Iranian interests, and, by extension, a member of the Shiite
coalition fighting to prop up the regime of Assad. But over the course of the
conflict, Hezbollah evolved into something much more serious.
They have established themselves as the most competent and successful military
operator of all the Shi'a factions, better even than Assad's armies.
Over the course of the conflict they have grown and expanded the spectrum of
their military capacity, grown in battlefield experience, and gained
specialist expertise. Continued Iranian support also translated into an
expanded arsenal. And its history of success has attracted increasing numbers
of recruits.
As the Syrian conflict seems to be drawing to a close, Hezbollah stands not as
a militia, but more like a competent standing army. Second only to the Russian
armed forces in the Syrian theatre. Except that the Russian forces will retire
from the region at some point. Hezbollah will remain. And will continue to
project power for decades to come.
Regional balance of power
The consequences of this for the regional balance of power are, as always,
hard to anticipate. But given their geopolitical alignment, it should not take
a genius to figure out that the outcomes will not be favorable to American
interests. Rather, they will be very favourable for Iran.
This is something that should have been anticipated by the Oval Office.
Hezbollah did not emerge as a military leader in the Syrian conflict out of
nowhere. They have been building up over the years, and the trajectory of
their rise should was evident all along.
When Obama failed to enforce his red line of chemical weapons in 2013, and
effectively handed over Syria to Russia and Iran, the preconditions of the
rise of Hezbollah were baked into that equation.
But the more egregious failure came in 2015. Obama and Iran finally agreed on
the shape of a deal to stop Iran's nuclear programme in exchange for sanctions
relief. In many ways, this was a great achievement.
What is more, Iran has stuck to the terms of the deal, and has shown that
future initiatives like this to stop nuclear proliferation can be made to work
even with long-time enemies.
Nuclear program
Yet Iran's side of the bargain concerned only its nuclear program. Iran did
not sign up to being best buddies with the US. They retain their own
geopolitical interests, and they retain the unrestricted capacity to pursue
those interests by any means they see fit. That the nuclear deal made no
reference to Syria and Iran's role in that conflict is its biggest weakness.
The US could and should have taken a stance on Iran's involvement in Syria.
The nuclear deal concerns Iran's essential interests. Syria is pivotal for
Tehran's geopolitical play, but in 2015 was significantly less important than
sanction relief.
There is every reason to believe that they would have agreed to restrain their
involvement in Syria, which in turn would have seriously diminished Hezbollah.
But the Obama administration chose to not even try to pursue this option. And
American interests in the region will suffer for decades as a consequence.
Azeem Ibrahim is Senior Fellow at the Centre for Global Policy and Adj
Research Professor at the Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College.
©
EsinIslam.Com
Add Comments