By Ghassan Istanbuli for Al Maydeen – Source in Arabic Language
It is very obvious to any sane person that everything that happened and is happening in the region through the past decades, especially during the last ten years, was aimed at striking and dismantling the Axis of Resistance, because it is the only factor that poses a threat to the Zionist entity, whether this danger is strategic, by working on removing this entity, or tactically, by braking its expansion and minimizing its impact in the region.
Axis of Resistance: Syria, Iran, Lebanon (Hezb Allah and a number of active factions), Iraq (at least the PMU), the anti-Israeli factions in occupied Palestine, and in the Gaza Strip, and Yemen.
From this standpoint, came the agreement to strengthen military and security cooperation, signed a few days ago in Damascus by the Syrian Minister of Defense and the Chief of Staff of the Iranian army.
Anyone who tracks the acceleration of the US war on the region, especially on both Syria and Iran, will see that this agreement came within the natural context of the two countries’ decision to respond firmly together, and with all capabilities, to the US-Israeli aggression, they are both exposed to.
If we try to highlight some points of this agreement, we will find that the point worth clarifying is the Russian position on what is taking place, as, despite Russia’s full support for Syria in combating terrorism, which was manifested in various fields, we see that it remains deficient in dealing with the Israeli attacks on Syria, because of the friendship and the relationship of interests between Russia and ‘Israel’.
It is clear that Syria understands, albeit reluctantly, the reasons for Russia’s reservations about activating the S300 missile system, while it considers that the more advanced version of this system, the S400, is already in Turkey. Syria has the right, and indeed its duty, to search for an alternative that fills this gap. Certainly, there is no stronger alternative than its alliance with Iran. This alliance, which stood up to all the US temptations and threats, and the reasons are multiple and known, and in its forefront comes that the two countries are linked by a common destiny in profit and loss.
Therefore, we find that Iran considers Syria its first defense bulwark, just as Syria considers Iran the strongest back it can rely on. For this reason, the latter decided to provide Syria with its latest weapons, especially its air defenses, led by the Khordad 3 missile system, which succeeded in bringing down the US “RQ Global Hawk” drone, which is considered the crown of the US Air Force drones.
Here, a distinction must be made between a Russian friend and an Iranian ally, for an ally cannot be your ally and your enemy ally at the same time, while a friend can.
And if we look a little more closely on this aspect, we must realize that the relationships between friends, as well as allies, are complementarity, not relationships that are identical. From this standpoint, we find that the three countries understand each other’s positions, and always work to closes the gaps within the differences between them.
Accordingly, it would be far from realistic to say that Russia is not satisfied with this agreement, it may have even been the one that encouraged it, to avoid the embarrassment of not providing full air support to Syria, and to leave the Iranian weapon the task of filling this gap.
Here, Iran is credited for making an important step towards its ally Syria, and its one step away from its friend Turkey, because it knows that this missile system may be used at any time against Turkish air forces if matters escalate towards a comprehensive and major military conflict between the two countries.
As for the effects of this agreement on the enemy side concerned, we will notice several points:
- The signatory countries gave, through this agreement, a clear, public, and firm decision that Iran is present in Syrian territory with Syrian request and coordination, to support it in the war imposed on it, and that the US and the Israeli requests for Iranian exit from Syria are absolutely rejected.
- The borders of any future armed clash between any of the parties to the Resistance Axis and ‘Israel’ will be the northern border with occupied Palestine.
- This agreement came to expose Netanyahu, and to say that his work over the past years in striking Iranian sites in Syria, to reduce Iranian influence, prevent its danger to ‘Israel’, and the news leaking about the responsibility of ‘Israel’ of the recent acts of sabotage in Iran; all of that was nothing but media and electoral work, and it had no effect on the ground. On the contrary, the Iranian presence in Syria has become stronger, and the Iranian response to sabotage will be harsh if the investigations prove that it was sabotage actions led by ‘Israel’.
In conclusion, we believe that this agreement is certainly not for media consumption, nor a maneuver, and it is not a battle between wars, but rather a decision of complete confrontation and a decision of victory.