Iran on the Horizon: Panel III: Iran and The Levant
Event Featuring:
Overview
The Iran and Levant panel discussed Iran’s relationship in the Middle East from the perspectives of Jordan, Syria, and Hizbullah. They addressed the prospect that Syria’s strategic relationship with Iran could be broken if the US and Israel could guarantee the Golan Heights, and that Hizbullah and Iran’s partnership is based on common strategic goals against the Israeli occupation. All panelists agreed that many of the current conflicts and alliances stem from the Arab-Israeli conflict.
Event Summary
Trita Parsi offered an introduction to some critical issues between Arab states and Iran, including Syria’s unexpected participation in Annapolis despite Iran’s advice and the implications of the Jordanian President’s current reluctance to utilize his own phrase “Shia Crescent.” In addition, he brought to the audience’s attention the accusation that Lebanon’s political instability could fuel a proxy war between Iran and the US. According to Parsi, the relationship between Iran and the Levant has improved although the stability and the advancement of these positive relations are questionable.
Fares Braizat concentrated on three main spheres of the Levant’s relations with Iran: sectarian religious identity, geopolitical trade, history, and security. He stated that Shi‘a Islam serves as a factor in galvanizing current political support and can mobilize around strong anti-Western sentiments. The sectarian identities were utilized by the US as a factor in developing the new government in Iraq, which according to Braizat undermined the promotion of democratic ideals and was unwise.
In terms of geopolitical trade, Iran has become closer in proximity to the Levant as a result of its involvement with Iraq since the US invasion. Iran supported the military wing and political elites. Only recently have the other Arab states become involved in Iraq, and according to Braizat, this is positive development.
Lastly, he focused on the history and security of the Middle East and current Jordanian Iranian relations. He offered a brief overview of Jordanian/Iranian relations from 1949 to the present. Historically, Jordan and Iran had strong relations and many agreements were signed. During the Iranian Revolution, their relations were strained as a result of the proliferation of Shi‘a adversary groups in Jordan. Braizat concluded by highlighting Jordan’s concern of preventing an emerging “Shi‘a Crescent,” yet stressed the importance of diplomatic relations between Jordan and Iran.
Murhaf Jouejati discussed Iran’s present, past, and future relationship with Syria. According to Jouejati, the relationship between Iran and Syria resembles one of a big brother. Iran invests heavily in Syria’s economy and Jouejati projected an increase from two to ten billion by the year 2010. Jouejati disputes the notion that Syria and Iran have formed an alliance based on sectarian ties and the threat of a “Shi‘a Crescent.” Instead he considered the alliance to be a result of Iran’s stance on Israel. Furthermore, he highlighted the fact that Syria is surrounded by the US power in the form of Turkey, Jordan, Israel, and Lebanon, and feels victim of US economic sanctions, which strengthens Syria’s alliance with Iran. During the leadership of Hafiz Al-Asad, Syria and Iran had an equal partnership although it was never void of problems. For instance, Syria strongly opposed the TWA highjacking. Currently, the relationship between Syria and Iran resembles one of a “patron-client” with Syria as the junior partner. However, Syria is trying to signal the US to resume talks with Israel. For instance, Syria attended Annapolis despite Iran’s objections. He concluded that Syria would break their alliance with Iran if they were provided with “iron clad” guarantees to recover the Golan Heights.
Judith P. Harik addressed the relationship between Hizbullah and Iran. She offered insights into their past, present, and future relationship. For instance, Tehran sent a mission to live in Lebanon to manage reconstruction for the Lebanese infrastructure and institutions preceding the war in 2006. In the past, Iran Revolutionary guards provided military and training and financial resources supplies to resist against the Israeli occupation. Presently, Hizbullah is no longer under the Iranian Revolutionary guard’s influence and there is no proof they were involved in aiding Hizbullah in the 2006 war. Tehran has also been able to develop a role in Lebanon’s internal politics that has encouraged the sects to resolve differences in a peaceful manner. Harik concluded by offering present and future insight into the relationship between Hizbullah and Iran. According to Harik, Iran and Hizbullah have created an equal partnership based on common strategic goals. She suggested that the US foreign policy makers consider Hizbullah as independent from Iran and serving in the interests of Lebanon.
About this Event
Remarks delivered at The Ritz-Carlton Hotel, 2:00-3:45pm February 1st 2008.
Speaker Details
Trita Parsi is President of the National Iranian Council.
Fares A. Braizat is Deputy Director and researcher at the Center for Strategic Studies at the University of Jordan – Amman.
Murhaf Jouejati is a professor at the National Defense University’s Near East South Asia Center for Strategic Studies. Jouejati is also Adjunct Professor at George Washington University, and Adjunct Scholar at the Middle East Institute.
Judith P. Harik taught at American University of Beirut as an Associate Professor until 2003, and is currently President of Beirut’s Matn University.
Attributions
Lena Halasa, an undergraduate student in International Relations at Calvin College and a Programs Department intern at the Middle East Institute wrote this brief. This brief was peer-edited by So Min Oh, an undergraduate student in International Studies at American University and a research assistant at the Middle East Institute.
