The Fall of Syria Was an American-Israeli Plot

In an interview with Lebanon’s Al-Mayadeen network, the President of Iran’s Strategic Council on Foreign Relations emphasized, "Our primary goal in aiding Syria was to combat Takfiri groups and ensure the security of Syria, Iraq, and Iran. Even after the war, we maintained communication with opposition representatives under the Astana initiative. If they have genuinely moved beyond Takfiri ideology and are seeking coexistence, it demonstrates the success of our fight against Takfiri elements."

Addressing the recent threats by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu against Iran, he remarked, "The plan to change the system of the Islamic Republic, has been on the U.S. agenda since the Islamic Revolution. However, the Islamic Republic of Iran has resolutely defended its sovereignty by strengthening its deterrence capabilities, and this path will continue. They are well aware of our existing and potential capabilities."

Commenting on the effects the Syria’s regime change on the Resistance Axis, Kharrazi said, "Resistance is deeply rooted in the spirit of every Palestinian and does not fade with the departure of leaders. Since 1947, it has only grown stronger."

He also referred to Israeli threats against Yemen, stating, "They are afraid of Israeli attacks and, in turn, pose a significant threat to Israel’s security. Even Tel Aviv is not secured against their hypersonic missiles."

The President of the Strategic Council on Foreign Relations also addressed Iran’s nuclear issue, emphasizing that nuclear negotiations depend on Trump’s yet-unclear policies. He added, "But our policy is clear. The Islamic Republic of Iran is prepared both to continue negotiations and to confront pressures. Our reaction will be proportionate to their behavior."A

Kharrazi also assessed the strengthening of Iran’s relations with China and Russia as positive and expressed support for China’s efforts to establish a new global order, highlighting the role of emerging regional powers in this process.

The full text of the interview of Al Mayadeen with Kharrazi comes as follows:

Al Mayadeen: The region is witnessing numerous developments, among which the events in Syria and the fall of the former regime in Damascus, alongside Israel's aggressive behavior on several fronts, stand out. Meanwhile, uncertainty continues to characterize the future of Iran's relations with Western countries, especially one month before Donald Trump officially takes office as President of the United States. What balance of power will emerge under these circumstances? How does Tehran assess the future of its strategic relations in the region and internationally? These questions and others were raised in an exclusive interview in Tehran, Iran's capital, with Seyed Kamal Kharrazi, the President of the Strategic Council on Foreign Relations of Iran.

Question: Syria has always been a point of convergence and divergence among Tehran, Ankara, and Moscow. Numerous narratives have been published regarding the fall of the former regime in Syria. How does Tehran interpret what has happened? Was a plot against Tehran devised somewhere?

Answer: The three countries that were part of the Astana Initiative collaborated to address the problems of Syria and its opposition forces. However, each of the three countries pursued its objectives. Our goal was to support the Resistance. Turkey pursued its agenda, as did Russia. Israel, too, was following its own goals, frequently bombing Syria. Despite having control over Syrian airspace, Russia did not take action against Israel's bombings.

The events unfolded as they did, and opposition forces managed to advance rapidly and capture major cities for several reasons. The most critical reason was that the Syrian army did not resist.

This was undeniably an American-Israeli plan. Evidence of this is the immediate visit of U.S. officials to Damascus and their meetings with opposition leaders. They even revoked the $10 million bounty placed on the capture of Mr. Golani. This, in itself, proves that the plan was American.

Various groups and countries, including Turkey, played a role in this event and will continue to do so in the future. For this reason, regional cooperation is critical to resolving Syria's issues. It cannot be resolved without regional collaboration.

Turkey has had a historical territorial dispute with Syria. This dispute motivated Turkey to provide logistical and training support to opposition forces in their efforts to take control of Syria. Such discord happened in the past as well. When I served as Foreign Minister, there was a similar territorial discord between Syria and Turkey, which was resolved through mediation by Iran and Egypt.

All these factors played a role. Both the American-Israeli plan and Turkey's territorial disputes with Syria contributed to the fall of Bashar al-Assad's government.

Question: How do you assess the performance of the new ruling groups in Syria so far? Is there direct contact with them? What factors will shape Tehran's future relations with these groups?

Answer: The primary reason we supported Bashar al-Assad’s government was to combat Takfiri groups. Takfiris posed a threat to the entire region—not just to Syria but also to the security of Iraq and Iran. Our assistance to the Syrian government was because it was a member of the Resistance Axis against Israel. Otherwise, there was no similarity between our system and the Syrian system.

The opposition forces currently in control of Syria have, so far, not taken any specific actions against the Islamic Republic of Iran. While their positions may not be positive toward Iran, they have not acted against us. Our stance and actions toward them will depend on their future behavior and positions.

What matters most to us is the independence and territorial integrity of Syria. We hope this will be maintained, and in the future, Syrian youth be able to defend their country against Israel's aggressions.

Question: Based on your statements, Damascus was the lifeline of the Resistance Axis. What impact will regime change have on the resistance equation? And how can it be described today, following the attacks on Gaza and Lebanon, as well as the fall of the Syrian regime?

Damascus played a critical role in the Resistance Axis. What happened aligns with a strategy articulated by Netanyahu in 1996 and later reiterated in 2002 before the U.S. Senate. He stated that the solution to the Palestinian issue is the overthrow of governments supporting Palestine. What occurred was the implementation of this strategy.

In the face of this strategy, nations must resist and prevent Netanyahu’s success on this matter. This policy has always been backed by the U.S.; for instance, Obama was the first to declare that "Assad must go." Thus, U.S. policy has consistently opposed Bashar al-Assad’s government, and the events that transpired were the result of such a strategy.

However, the resistance will persist, as its roots lie deep in the spirit and identity of the Palestinian people. As long as they face aggression from the Israeli regime and as long as their lands are occupied, this resistance will continue. It will not fade away with the rise and fall of this or that government.

No one predicted the emergence of Hamas and Islamic Jihad—powerful, motivated armed groups capable of defending Palestine against Israeli aggression. This phenomenon was entirely unforeseen. Consequently, Palestinian resistance began in 1947, is grown stronger.

No one believed that the West Bank would one day be armed. Yet today, armed groups in the West Bank are also defending the Palestinian cause. All these developments demonstrate that the roots of resistance are so deeply entrenched that neither strategies, wars, nor even the overthrow of certain governments can extinguish it.

 Our goal is to achieve comprehensive peace and security across the region, and the way to do this is to have a powerful region. It is Iran’s strength that has prevented any external aggression

Question: Considering Israel’s advance deep into Syrian territory, the destruction of Syria’s strategic military infrastructure, and the absence of Syrian radar systems and Russian air defenses in the region, is Iran facing greater threats than before?

Israeli aggression in Syria is not a new phenomenon. The Golan Heights have been under Israeli occupation for decades. Recently, however, the Israeli regime has taken advantage of the lack of governance in Syria to expand its aggression. As a result, it has occupied more territories, and conducted extensive daily bombardments, targeting Syria’s military and even civilian facilities. The Israeli threat existed before and continues to grow today.

As for threats to Iran, even during Bashar al-Assad’s tenure, the Israeli regime sought to threaten Iran. From that perspective, the situation has not changed. Back then, Israel used the airspace of Jordan, Syria, and Iraq to launch long-distance attacks on our military centers. Therefore, regarding threats, there has been no significant shift on this issue. We must resist Israeli aggression, and we have the power to do so, as we have already demonstrated.

Question: Netanyahu is no longer merely threatening to attack Iran’s nuclear sites; he is now vowing to overthrow the Islamic Republic of Iran. Recently, he even addressed the Iranian people, promising them what he called "freedom from the Iranian regime." Have you taken the possibility of foreign intervention by the U.S. and Israel, with European support, to overthrow the government seriously?

The plan to change Iran’s government is not new. This American-Israeli plan has been pursued in various forms since the Islamic Revolution in Iran. From attempted coups to supporting Saddam in the war against Iran, they have tried to overthrow our government. They have also tested maximum pressure through sanctions, but they failed. Therefore, this is not a new issue.

Naturally, in the face of such conspiracies, we must be strong. Strength is the only means of establishing deterrence against their plots. From the outset of the revolution, we have taken this path. As a result, we possess substantial capabilities, and our enemies are fully aware of both, our existing and potential capabilities.

Question: Israel’s continuous aggression and threats against Yemen, which remains resolute in supporting Gaza, persist. What is Tehran’s stance on this matter, and what strategic consequences could a new war against Yemen entail?

The Yemenis have so far defended themselves exceptionally well and have supported the Palestinians. Yemenis are highly intelligent people. In practice, Israeli ports in the Red Sea have been rendered bankrupt due to the Yemeni attacks on ships heading toward those ports. Beyond that, today Tel Aviv is secured against Yemen’s hypersonic missiles. Just yesterday, another missile struck Tel Aviv, causing casualties.

Therefore, the Yemenis are resilient. They are not intimidated by war or aggression from the Israeli regime and the U.S., and they are steadfastly defending their identity and supporting Palestine.

Question: It is no secret that the popular base of the resistance, especially in Lebanon, believes that Iran could have done more to deter Israel and prevent its continued crimes, particularly after the martyrdom of Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah. What do you say to them?

We have never withheld assistance from the people of Lebanon and the Lebanese resistance. We have provided everything we could. The participation of the Lebanese resistance in the war against the Israeli regime was their own initiative. Resistance forces across the region—whether in Lebanon, Yemen, Palestine, or Iraq—do not act under our orders; rather, they confront the Israeli regime and its aggressions at their own discretion.

However, we do not believe that the escalation of war to encompass the entire region is in anyone's interest. When war spreads across the region, everyone will suffer, and all parties will intervene. Nevertheless, if Iran is attacked, we will respond reciprocally, as we have done decisively in the past.

Question: From a strategic perspective in the region, has the Turkey-Qatar axis, supported by the U.S., truly become the determinant of regional policies, coinciding with the decline of other nations such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq?

Such developments have occurred frequently in our region. Throughout history, there have been repeated instances of interventions, assassinations, coups, and other events. It is too early to make a swift judgment now. We need to wait and see how the situation unfolds. There is a high risk of conflict among various groups and the potential fragmentation of Syria, given the likelihood of interventions from actors like the U.S., Turkey, and the Israeli regime.

Another point to consider is whether a new Syrian government, even if it manages to resolve its internal issues, will remain loyal to those who support it. Do you recall who primarily supported the Taliban in Afghanistan? It was Pakistan. Yet today, the Taliban are not loyal to Pakistan and have numerous conflicts with them.

Thus, the region’s developments are so complex that it is impossible to make definitive predictions. We must wait. As we say in Persian, "The chickens should be counted at the end of autumn." This means that the situation in the region is so dynamic that its outcome cannot be predicted at this point.

Question: Regarding the nuclear file, do you anticipate the resumption of indirect negotiations with Washington if Donald Trump returns to the presidency? What are Tehran's conditions for this? Will the near future see a severe confrontation or mutual flexibility between Washington and Tehran?

First of all, Mr. Trump’s policies remain unclear. However, we are both prepared for negotiations and ready to resist any pressures. It depends on the policies they choose to pursue. They previously tested the maximum pressure policy, which was a failure. Therefore, we are in no rush. We must wait to see what policies they adopt, and we will determine our responses accordingly.

We are prepared for any scenario, but Mr. Trump is unpredictable. We need to wait and see what policies he decides to adopt.

Question: In a recent interview with Al-Mayadeen, you warned that the Islamic Republic might reconsider its nuclear doctrine. Given Trump’s moves to reimpose sanctions and Israel’s threats, is the time for such an action near, or is it still distant?

Fundamentally, we are opposed to nuclear weapons. However, if they take measures against us, we will naturally respond appropriately and at the right time.

Question: It is clear that Trump will return to his strict policies toward China, which could potentially strengthen relations between Tehran and Beijing. Where has the rapprochement between the two countries reached in terms of strategic cooperation and fostering multilateralism?

Relations between Iran and China are progressing very well. The policy that the Chinese have adopted aims to reduce reliance on the U.S. dollar and to escape the control of financial mechanisms dominated by the U.S., such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. We commend this approach and believe that mechanisms like BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, or the New Development Bank are essential to moving away from those systems and the dominance of the dollar.

Significant steps have been taken in this direction, all of which contribute to the emergence of a new world order that we support. A new world order that emerging regional powers would play an active role in.

Question: What new actions or policies might be adopted in this regard?

The establishment of BRICS, enabling its member states to trade with one another using national currencies; the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, within its area of responsibilities; and the New Development Bank, which facilitates loans and development projects—these are all mechanisms that assist member states, representing a vast portion of the world’s population.

Question: In the realm of strategic relations, particularly about Iran’s relationship with Moscow, has there been any discord between the two sides following recent events in Syria, or does strategic alignment persist?

Iran and Russia share longstanding, historic relations, which have expanded significantly in recent years. A strategic cooperation agreement has been prepared between Iran and Russia and will soon be signed. Of course, every country pursues its policies. This means that relations between Iran and Russia are not entirely without disagreements. However, what matters is identifying the areas of cooperation and the common grounds between the two nations.

Currently, we have extensive fields of cooperation with Russia, and we are planning to expand these further. So far, these relations have progressed well and are expected to develop even further.

There may be differences of opinion in some areas, which is entirely natural.

Question: Could the events in Syria potentially alter the dynamics between Moscow and Tehran?

No. We had shared views on Syria. Both Russia and Iran entered Syria, and one of our key achievements there was the defeat of extremist groups such as ISIS, Al-Qaeda, and others.

If today Syrian opposition groups claim to have moved beyond extremist ideologies, it reflects the success of Iran, Russia, and Syria in combating extremist forces.

If the current Syrian leadership genuinely abandons Takfiri ideology, it will be a victory for the Syrian people, for Iran, for Russia, and for the entire region, as Takfiri groups had posed a serious threat to regional security.

Our hope is for Syria to become a secure and stable country for its people to prosper, and for it to stand firm against the aggressions of the Israeli regime.

Question: Considering these regional developments, what is the future of relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia?

Relations with Saudi Arabia are progressing well. Following the agreements reached between Iran and Saudi Arabia, mutual visits have been conducted, and we are optimistic that both countries will play their part in ensuring peace and security in the region.

We believe that the countries in this region should come together, engage in dialogue, and form a strong regional bloc. Strength is what prevents external powers from achieving their objectives. Iran and Saudi Arabia are two important countries in this region, and we hope they will take steps in this direction.

Question: Finally, if we were to describe Iran’s current position based on its strategic relations in the region, how would you evaluate it?

Iran is an important country with a crucial role in this region. Our goal is to achieve comprehensive peace and security across the region, and the way to do this is to have a powerful region. It is Iran’s strength that has prevented any external aggression.

If Iran and other countries in the region unite to form a regional power, the region will enjoy greater security and deterrence.