(Organised by the Centre for Policy Research on 20th January, 2025)
Speaker:
Ambassador Talmiz Ahmad, former Indian ambassador and expert on West Asia; and Ram Sathe Chair, International Studies, Symbiosis International University, Pune.
Moderator:
Ambassador Gautam Mukhopadhaya, Senior Visiting Fellow, CPR and former Ambassador of India to Syria, Afghanistan and Myanmar.
The Centre for Policy Research (CPR) conducted a talk on the developments in the Syrian Arab Republic, revolving around the collapse of the Bashar al-Assad Government, in offline mode at the India International Centre (IIC), on the 20th of January, 2025. The objective behind the talk was to analyse the ramifications of Assad’s collapse in the Middle East and global politics, the emergence of the Hayat Tahreer al-Sham (HTS) as a military and political force in the country, and the factors that facilitated its capture of the Syrian capital, Damascus.
Featuring former Indian Ambassador Talmiz Ahmad, the talk followed two hours of intense deliberation, delving into the multifaceted nature of the Syrian civil war and how each of these facets is set to undergo a fundamental transformation amidst the collapse of the Bashar al-Assad Government. Further, the discussion escalated to a discussion of the impact the collapse of the Assad Government and the rise of the HTS would have on the dynamics of Washington, Moscow, and Ankara with regards to Syria as well as resulted in the conflict being situated amidst the already existing geopolitical rivalries in the Middle East, between Washington and the Moscow-Tehran axis as well as Doha, Riyadh, Ankara, and Tel Aviv.
Moderator's Comments
Amb Gautam Mukhopadhya introduced the Guest Speaker and spoke about the ceasefire declared between Israel and Hamas, specifically speculating as to whether it would help bring about peace in the Middle East, which has now been devastated by conflict.
The moderator commented on the way in which the news of the ceasefire has trumped and largely overshadowed the events in Syria (by the standards of the Western media), which have mostly shocked international observers and specifically, researchers specialising in West Asian studies.
While providing a general overview of what occurred in the Syrian Arab Republic in the days leading up to the Assad Government’s collapse, the moderator implored on Amb Talmiz Ahmad to explore the intricacies of regime change in the country, as to whether the fall of Assad’s dictatorship be followed up by the country’s transition into democracy or an Islamic theocracy installed by the HTS.
Amb Gautam Mukhopadhya raised a significantly important question as to the impact of Assad’s collapse on its geopolitical power equations with other states in the Middle East, specifically how its Sunni fundamentalism would affect its relations with the power brokers in the Middle East, like Doha, Riyadh, Cairo, and other Gulf States.
The moderator provided an insight into the political opportunism and the geopolitical power vacuum that has emerged due to Assad’s collapse, which has resulted in other actors like Israel, exploiting the political instability to capture more Syrian territory, beyond the already occupied Golan Heights.
The Talk
Amb Talmiz Ahmad began the discussion by talking about the narratives promoted by Western media, emphasising how Western media tends to portray events in the Middle East as separate and distinct dots or points of conflict, essentially providing observers or audiences with a convoluted version of the Middle East as only a region of constant and disproportionate yet brutal conflict, without actually connecting these dots or placing these in the broader context of geopolitical power equations.
He emphasised the biasses that exist in Western historiographies revolving around the Middle East which can all be traced to the way in which the West was responsible for drawing the geographical and political borders in West Asia, where the majority of the borders in the Arabian Peninsula post the World War I, were Western creations.
Talking on the lines of postcolonial thinking, Amb Talmiz Ahmad used these counter-narratives to come to the conclusion that even if political and economic independence or freedom are not impossible in a country that has emerged from a colonial past, it is almost impossible for a country to gain intellectual independence and unbiased or informed discourses about its past, primarily because of the prevailing intellectual dominance of Western narratives, thus making it difficult for local micro-narratives to counter these meta-narratives.
Drawing upon the known history of the origin of the Syrian civil war, he underlined how the Assad government’s mishandling of the protests led to the significant levels of violence which erupted into a civil war. The volatility, according to him, created a vacuum for domestic and international actors to intervene. Drawing an inference from this, he placed this situation in Syria amidst the larger status of the Arab Spring in West Asia, explaining how it virtually destroyed the Riyadh-Cairo Axis by removing a stable Saudi supporter in Hosni Mubarak, prompting Riyadh to push for regime change in Syria to push a pro-Iran State to debilitation.
Furthermore, he believed that this regime change project heralded by Riyadh led them to oppose US efforts at directly bombing Syrian territory to prevent an Afghanistan or Iraq-like situation from arising, thus pushing for Riyadh to advocate for supporting and arming militias within Syria which would depose Assad and allow for the majority Sunni state of Syria to enter the Arab mainstream and initiate a domino effect which would place all Arab States under the Riyadh fold and create a steady Anti-Tehran front.
Moving on to the expansion of Al Qaeda into Syrian territory and the subsequent creation and expansion of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), Amb Talmiz Ahmad pointed to the critical role of Abu Mohammed al-Julani, who significantly advocated for aligning with Ayman al-Zawahiri and the Al Qaeda, rather than Baghdadi’s ISIS.
Echoed throughout the meeting, was a regret expressed by the Ambassador, for not having closely monitored the events unfolding in Idlib and instead focusing on Damascus, when in reality, the events in Idlib would go on to define the events happening in Syria today. He was primarily referring to the founding of the Hayat Tahreer al-Sham (HTS) by Julani who was at the time, camped in Idlib and re-emerged only after the decisive defeat dealt to the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). Julani, according to him, was also critical to the alliance formed between the HTS and Turkiye, which had already created anti-Assad militias such as the Syrian National Army. He additionally pointed to two interviews given by Julani, to both CNN and PBS, which portrayed him, a former Al Qaeda cadre member, as a “moderate” and “modern”- fitting the Western narrative for any form of regime change.
Adding on to the Western orchestrated narrative about regime change, he even noted the change in uniform for Julani, who had now “elevated” from the guerilla-style uniform to a suit and Western-defined formal wear, all of which served as brilliant photo opportunities for a former Al Qaeda leader trying to portray himself to the world as a moderate and responsible figure. Moreover, he pointed out the change in name, where Julani abandoned his previous name to adopt the name- Ahmed al-Sharaa.
Bringing in the Kurdish angle, he posited that Iraqi and Syrian Kurds setting up autonomous zones across Syria and providing training and sanctuary to the Turkish Kurds who happened to be aligned with the anti-Ankara PKK prompted the Turks to launch a military intervention into Syria.
Speculating about the international involvement in the events which led to Assad’s collapse, he believed that it could only be the result of a conspiracy jointly hatched between Turkiye, the United States of America, and Israel in close coordination with each other, and not by any one of them working individually. Moreover, any and all arguments about Israel being unaware of this regime change would fall flat, primarily because it is highly unlikely that Israel, being a significant rival to Damascus, especially due to the Arab-Israeli Wars, its annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights, and fears of Hezbollah influence in Syria, was far less likely to not be aware of such a regime change.
He emphatically analysed how the events in Syria would have an impact on Turkiye, which according to him, would now be a step ahead in Erdogan’s vision of “The Turkish Century”, a somewhat revivalist neo-Ottoman project aimed at bringing back the glory of the erstwhile Ottoman Empire. The situation in Syria helps Ankara in two ways: One, by allowing the Turks to now gather enough political momentum to eliminate the remnants of the Kurdish forces to the north of Syria and second, by being responsible for almost orchestrating regime change in Syria through the HTS which the West is now desperate to legitimise as a responsible political force within Syria, Erdogan has essentially elevated Ankara’s role in West Asian geopolitics, essentially paving the way for his neo-Ottoman project.
Speculating about the American role in the events unfolding in Syria, Amb Talmiz Ahmad proposed the potentiality of two reasons: One, that the Americans wanted to embarrass Moscow at a time when the war in Ukraine was already creating pressure in the Kremlin. Second, that regime change was orchestrated in an attempt to isolate the Islamic Republic of Iran and protect another one of Israel’s conflict-ridden flanks and to bring the Syrian Arab Republic into the Western sphere of alliances.
Speaking on the other contemporary developments in the West Asian region, he posed certain questions with regard to the recent US-mediated ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas. While hailing the phased-out process of prisoner and hostage exchanges, he was primarily concerned with the possibility of Tel Aviv going through with the withdrawal process, especially considering that Netanyahu has been adamant about withdrawing from the peace process if Hamas is found violating any provision of the ceasefire deal; as well as internal assurances from Netanyahu to his rather politically extreme compatriots in the Knesset that Gaza would not be fully abandoned by the Israelis.
Additionally, he commented on the absolute collapse of US restraint on Israeli actions, referencing Bob Woodward’s “War”, as to how former President Biden had been abusing Netanyahu behind closed doors while not being able to do anything to rein him into reducing the intensity of his bombardment campaign in Gaza or bringing Tel Aviv to the negotiating table early on.
Talking about the long-term ramifications of the events in the West Asian region, Amb Talmiz Ahmad believed that Israeli military actions in Gaza were virtually futile because they failed to debilitate Hamas since they were able to replace their killed forces with the same numbers as existed when the war initially began. Moreover, Assad’s collapse in Syria has prompted Moscow and Tehran to react effectively, which could explain their signing of a Comprehensive Strategic Treaty. This could severely affect the negotiations for the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) or the Iran nuclear deal due to the possibility of Moscow providing Tehran with nuclear material to build nuclear weapons as part of a deterrence net. However, he also noted the two-pronged nature of Iranian diplomacy, with Tehran engaging closely with Moscow on one hand, and extending an olive branch to the E3/EU+3 (European Union + The United Kingdom, France, and Germany; the European representatives at the JCPOA negotiations) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) about the possibility of a nuclear deal.
He specifically pointed out the failure of Washington to completely bring Saudi Arabia within the American fold and orchestrate a normalisation agreement between Riyadh and Tel Aviv, primarily because of Riyadh’s insistence on the creation of a Palestinian State. Moreover, he implored the audience to pay attention to the creation of an initiative by the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) through the Vision for Regional Security document, which will play a key role in bringing about Arab unity at this point of intense conflict in the Middle East. He even speculated about the possibility of a new and revitalised role being played by Cairo, not necessarily in West Asia but rather in North Africa, due to its geographical proximity to and essential influence over the Red Sea and the Mediterranean Sea.
Amb Talmiz Ahmad posited that while it may be difficult to formulate a Palestinian State, it was still a possibility provided that there are changes in political attitudes in Tel Aviv. Additionally, with consistent blows being dealt to US hegemony within West Asia or even worldwide, he believed that geopolitics had now been fundamentally transformed at two levels: at one level, by the establishment of a binary of military security between Washington and Moscow reminiscent of the erstwhile Cold War, only now defined by not a clash of ideologies, but a clash of civilisations, between the US-led Western civilisation and the Russian-led anti-West civilisation. At another level, with the advent of multipolarity with the emergence of “Middle Powers” from Europe to Asia and Africa, determined to reject the binary competition and instead assert their roles as sovereign States, with countries like India, Malaysia and South-East Asia aiming for Strategic Autonomy. Additionally, he posited that Islam, as a strategic politico-military force, had become irrelevant in West Asian geopolitics.
Concluding Remarks
The talk concluded with the moderator, Amb Gautam Mukhopadhaya thanking the Guest Speaker for his insightful remarks on the topic. He summed up by explaining the fragile state in which the Middle East finds itself with the collapse of the Assad Government in Syria and how the clash of civilisations would go on to fundamentally alter geopolitics.
Ends.
The author, Aryan Ghosh, is a Junior Editor at Ramjas Political Review
コメント