Exclusive – 20 Years after Hafez Assad’s Death, Syria is an Open Arena for Foreign Players

Hafez Assad's funeral in June 2000.
Hafez Assad's funeral in June 2000.
TT

Exclusive – 20 Years after Hafez Assad’s Death, Syria is an Open Arena for Foreign Players

Hafez Assad's funeral in June 2000.
Hafez Assad's funeral in June 2000.

Russian President Vladimir Putin did not take part in late Syrian President Hafez Assad’s funeral two decades ago, but Russian forces have since then deployed in Syria and are boosted by military bases. Putin aspires to expand and bolster these bases by establishing a “soft” economic, social and political presence in Syria.

Then Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer attended Assad’s funeral. Now, Turkish forces are deployed in vast areas in northwestern, northern and northeastern Syria. The same goes to then Iranian President Mohammad Khatami. Now, Iranian Revolutionary Guards members are establishing a “shadow” state in Syria and setting up and training Syrian and non-Syrian militias. The American military is also present east of the Euphrates River. Twenty years prior, then Secretary of State Madelaine Albright had attended Assad’s funeral.

When then French President Jacques Chirac and British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook flew to Damascus for the funeral, they would have never predicted that their countries would now be part of the international coalition that controls northeastern Syria and bars any Syrian jets from those skies.

The coalition backs the Syrian Democratic Forces on the ground. The SDF includes the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) that receive some training from the Kurdistan Workers' Party, led by Abdullah Ocalan. Ocalan was jailed by Turkey soon after Assad allowed him to leave Syria to avert a war with Turkey in mid-1998.

Then Lebanese President Emile Lahoud, who was the last official to speak with Assad before his death, was the first to arrive in Damascus for the funeral. Lahoud would have never predicted that his ally, Hezbollah, would have intervened in the Syrian conflict in 2012 to held “save” the regime. He would have never predicted that it would now be deploying its fighters in different parts of Syria and that it would have the final say in Lebanon, effectively marginalizing “Syria’s role in Lebanon.” The shift in roles began with party chief Hassan Nasrallah’s attendance of Assad’s burial in al-Qardahah 20 years ago.

The list of dignitaries who attended Assad’s funeral after his death on June 10, 2000 underscored the regional and international role it played at the time and reflects the extent of the change that has taken place in Syria since then. Syria used to be a regional and international player with wide connections. Now, it has turned into an open arena where regional and international players tussle. Its “proxies”, military officers and intelligence agents used to operate in countries near and far, but now, the “proxies”, armies and agents of other nations play on its territories.

‘Correction’
Assad joined the ruling Baath party’s military council and was eventually appointed defense minister. In November 1970, he staged a military coup in what was known as the “Corrective Movement.” He ousted and jailed President Nureddin al-Atassi and was declared president in March 1971. On October 6, 1973, he joined Egyptian President Anwar Sadat in waging the October War against Israel. A year later, he signed the Agreement on Disengagement with Israel over the Golan Heights. In June, US President Richard Nixon visited Damascus to restore diplomatic relations that were frozen after the “June 1967 setback.”

Syria’s first foray in foreign intervention took place in 1976 when, with American and Soviet blessings, its military was sent to Lebanon during its civil war. A year later, its troops were deployed throughout nearly all Lebanese territories. Syrian troops and intelligence agents remained in Lebanon until April 2005 when they were forced to withdraw, in line with United Nations Security Council resolution 1559, after coming under massive international pressure in wake of the assassination of Lebanese former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.

Syria’s relations with its eastern neighbor Iraq were just as complicated. In 1979, Iraqi President Saddam Hussein accused Assad of “conspiring” against Baghdad, sparking tensions and conflicts between Iraq and Syria, each of which are ruled by rival branches of the Baath party. Relations during Assad’s final years improved. Trade relations were revived and diplomatic ties, which were severed in 1980 after Damascus backed Tehran in the Iraq-Iran war, were restored.

‘Balance’
A new page of strategic Syrian-Iranian relations was opened with Khomeini’s 1979 revolution. These relations will leave their impact on the Middle East for decades to come. Assad, however, balanced out these relations during the 1990s by remaining in the Arab fold through establishing strong ties with heavyweights, Saudi Arabia and Egypt. This trilateral alliance formed the foundation for Arab work and provided the necessary coordination for addressing developments and taking decisions.

In February 1982, Assad repelled an uprising by the Muslim Brotherhood in Hama city, which left tens of thousands of people dead. In late 1983, Assad suffered a heart attack. His brother, Rifaat attempted to seize the president’s incapacity to stage a coup, but failed. A year later, the younger Assad was exiled from Syria and still resides in Europe despite his attempts to return to his homeland after his brother’s death in 2000.

Without ‘cover’
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, with which Syria had signed a friendship and cooperation agreement in 1980, Assad shifted his attention to the West to improve his relations with the United States. He had deliberately avoided signing a strategic agreement with the Soviets or granting them permanent military bases, except in the small port of Tartus, in order to keep his options open with the West. He reaped the benefit of such foresight after he visited Moscow shortly before the Soviet collapse. He realized that the demise of his greatest ally was imminent and so he shifted his gaze to the West for a new “cover.” In the early 1990s, Syria joined the US-led multination alliance against Saddam after Iraq invaded Kuwait. In late 1991, Syria took part in the opening of the Madrid conference aimed at launching Arab-Israeli negotiations.

In October 1994, Assad met with American President Bill Clinton in Damascus, which had been the destination of dozens of visits by US secretaries of state in order to develop bilateral relations and push forward peace negotiations with Israel. Four years later, Assad traveled to Paris in his first visit to a western nation in 22 years. He was warmly received by Chirac, who had played an integral role in opening European doors to Assad.

Five ministers, five armies
Before Assad’s death, Syria’s troops were deployed in Lebanon, where Damascus held all the strings. Before his death, Syria was part of a trilateral front that included Turkey and Iran in deterring the establishment of a Kurdish state in northern Iraq. At the same time, it was part of the Damascus Declaration group that included Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Arab countries. It was also part of the tripartite alliance with Riyadh and Cairo. It had restored relations with Saddam, while also harboring his opponents.

Syria used to host organizations opposed to Israel, while also negotiating with Israel through American channels. In late March 2000, Assad and Clinton held a summit in Geneva in a last-ditch effort to reach peace.

In spring 1996, the foreign ministers of four nations, the US, Russia, France and Iran and European Union, each with rival interests, were in Damascus to reach the “April understanding” in wake of Israel’s Grapes of Wrath operation in southern Lebanon.

Today, Syria finds itself out of the Arab League. It is isolated and under the mercy of American and European sanctions. The American, Russian, Iranian, Turkish and Israeli air force are active on its territories and in its airspace. After the 2011 protests, half of the Syrian people have become displaced and 690,000 lives have been claimed by the war. Economic losses have topped 530 billion dollars, while the country still struggles with protests and shortages in food, medicine and water.

Syria, which used to vie for power beyond its border, is now an arena for the conflicts of others. From player to playground.



Report: Europe’s Options in the Strait of Hormuz Are Few and Risky

A cargo ship in the Gulf, near the Strait of Hormuz, as seen from northern Ras al-Khaimah, near the border with Oman’s Musandam, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in United Arab Emirates, March 11, 2026. (Reuters file)
A cargo ship in the Gulf, near the Strait of Hormuz, as seen from northern Ras al-Khaimah, near the border with Oman’s Musandam, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in United Arab Emirates, March 11, 2026. (Reuters file)
TT

Report: Europe’s Options in the Strait of Hormuz Are Few and Risky

A cargo ship in the Gulf, near the Strait of Hormuz, as seen from northern Ras al-Khaimah, near the border with Oman’s Musandam, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in United Arab Emirates, March 11, 2026. (Reuters file)
A cargo ship in the Gulf, near the Strait of Hormuz, as seen from northern Ras al-Khaimah, near the border with Oman’s Musandam, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in United Arab Emirates, March 11, 2026. (Reuters file)

When senior officials from 40 countries met virtually this week to discuss how to bring shipping traffic back to the Strait of Hormuz, Italy’s foreign minister had a proposal. He urged them to establish a “humanitarian corridor” allowing safe passage for fertilizer and other crucial goods headed to impoverished nations.

The plan, described after the meeting by Italian officials, was one of several competing proposals from Europe and beyond that were meant to prevent the Iran war from causing widespread hunger. But it was not endorsed by the envoys on the call, and the meeting ended with no concrete plan to reopen the strait, militarily or otherwise, reported the New York Times.

European leaders are under pressure from US President Donald Trump to commit military assets, immediately, to end Iran’s blockage of the strait and tame a growing global energy and economic crisis. They have refused to meet his demands by sending warships now. Instead, they are hotly debating what to do to help unclog the vital shipping lane once the war ends.

But they are struggling to rally around a plan of action.

That partly reflects the slow gears of diplomacy in Europe and the sheer number of nations, including Gulf states, that are invested in safeguarding the strait once the war ends. Many nations involved in the talks, including Italy and Germany, have insisted that any international effort be blessed by the United Nations, which could slow action further. Military leaders will take up the issue in discussions next week.

More than anything, the struggle reflects how difficult it could be to actually secure the strait under a fragile peace — for Europe or for anyone else. None of the options available to Europe, the Gulf states and other countries look foolproof, even under the assumption that the major fighting will have stopped.

Naval escorts

French officials, including President Emmanuel Macron, have repeatedly raised the possibility that French naval vessels could help escort merchant ships through the strait after the war ends.

American officials have pushed for Europeans and other allies, like Japan, to escort ships sailing under their own countries’ flags.

Naval escorts are expensive. Also, their air defense systems alone might not be sufficient to stop some types of attacks, like drone strikes, should Iran choose to start firing again.

“What does the world expect, what does Donald Trump expect, from let’s say a handful or two handfuls of European frigates there in the Strait of Hormuz,” Defense Minister Boris Pistorius of Germany said last month, “to achieve what the powerful American Navy cannot manage there alone?”

Sweep for mines

German and Belgian officials, among others, say they are prepared to send minesweepers to clear the strait of explosives after the war.

Western military leaders aren’t convinced that Iran has actually mined the strait, in part because some Iranian ships still pass through it. So while minesweepers might be deployed as part of a naval escort, they might not have much to do.

Help from above

Another option is sending fighter jets and drones to intercept any Iranian air assaults on ships. American officials have pushed Europe to do this.

It is quite expensive and still not guaranteed to work. Iran can attack ships with a single soldier in a speedboat, and if just a few attempts succeed, that could be enough to spook insurers and shipowners out of attempting passage.

Diplomacy

Another option are negotiations and economic leverage to pressure Iran to refrain from future attacks, and deploy a variety of military means to enforce that. This effort would go beyond Europe. On Thursday, the German foreign ministry called on China to use its influence with Iran “constructively” to help end the hostilities.

This option is expensive and still not guaranteed. Negotiations seem to have done little to stop the fighting. But this may be Europe’s best bet, for lack of a better one.

What if none of that works?

Iranian officials said this week that they would continue to control traffic through the strait after the war. They have already made plans to make ships pay tolls for passing through the strait, which is supposed to be an unfettered waterway under international law.

A continued blockage risks global economic disaster. Countries around the world rely on shipments through the strait for fuel and fertilizer, among other necessities.

In some regions, shortages loom. In others, like Europe, high oil, gas and fertilizer prices have raised the specter of spiking inflation and cratering economic growth.

“The big threat right now is stagflation,” said Hanns Koenig, a managing director at Aurora Energy Research, a Berlin consultancy. “You’ve got higher prices, and they strangle the tiny growth we would have seen this year.”

*Jim Tankersley for the New York Times


US Military Jets Hit in Iran War Are the First Shot Down by Enemy Fire in Over 20 Years

An F-15E Strike Eagle turns toward the Panamint range over Death Valley National Park, Calif., on Feb. 27, 2017. (AP)
An F-15E Strike Eagle turns toward the Panamint range over Death Valley National Park, Calif., on Feb. 27, 2017. (AP)
TT

US Military Jets Hit in Iran War Are the First Shot Down by Enemy Fire in Over 20 Years

An F-15E Strike Eagle turns toward the Panamint range over Death Valley National Park, Calif., on Feb. 27, 2017. (AP)
An F-15E Strike Eagle turns toward the Panamint range over Death Valley National Park, Calif., on Feb. 27, 2017. (AP)

Iran shooting down two American military jets marks an exceedingly rare assault for the US that has not happened in more than 20 years and shows Iran’s continued ability to hit back despite President Donald Trump asserting it has been “completely decimated.”

The attacks came five weeks after US and Israeli strikes first pounded Iran, with Trump saying earlier this week that Tehran's “ability to launch missiles and drones is dramatically curtailed."

Iran shot down a US F15-E Strike Eagle fighter jet Friday, with one service member getting rescued and the search still underway for a second, US officials say. Iranian state media also said a US A-10 attack aircraft crashed after being hit by Iranian defense forces.

The last time a US warplane was shot down by enemy fire in combat was an A-10 Thunderbolt II during the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, said retired Air Force Brig. Gen. Houston Cantwell, a former F-16 fighter pilot.

But, he said, that’s because the US had largely been fighting insurgents who didn’t have the same anti-aircraft capabilities. The fact that there have not been more fighter jets lost in Iran, Cantwell said, is a testament to the capabilities of US forces.

"The fact that this hasn’t happened until now is an absolute miracle,” said Cantwell, who served four combat tours and is now a senior resident fellow at the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies. “We’re flying combat missions here, they are being shot at every day.”

Shoulder-fired missile likely used, experts say

US Central Command said in a statement Wednesday that American forces have flown more than 13,000 missions in the Iran war while striking more than 12,300 targets.

After more than a month of punishing US-Israeli airstrikes, a degraded Iranian military nonetheless remains a stubborn foe. Its steady stream of strikes against Israel and Gulf Arab neighbors have been causing regional upheaval and global economic shock.

When it comes to American dominance over Iran's airspace, there’s still a distinction between air superiority and air supremacy, said Behnam Ben Taleblu, Iran program senior director at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a hawkish Washington think tank.

“A disabled air defense system is not a destroyed air defense system,” he said. “We shouldn’t be shocked that they’re still fighting.”

American planes have been flying missions at lower altitudes, which makes them more vulnerable to Iran's missiles, Taleblu said. It’s possible that Iran fired at the F-15 with a surface-to-air missile, but it's more likely that a portable, shoulder-fired missile was used, he said. Those are much harder to detect and reflect how Iran is “weak but still lethal.”

“This is a regime that is fighting for its life,” he said.

Mark Cancian, a retired Marine colonel and a senior defense adviser with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, agreed that a shoulder-fired missile was likely used against the fighter jet.

Nonetheless, the American air war against Iran has been a “tremendous success” so far, he said.

To put things in perspective, he said the loss rate for American warplanes flying over Germany during World War II was 3% at one point, which would equal about 350 warplanes in the US war against Iran.

“But then there’s the political side — you have an American public that is accustomed to fighting bloodless wars,” Cancian said. “Then a large part of the country doesn’t support the war. So to them, any loss is unacceptable.”

Pilots are trained on what to do if their plane is hit

The last US jet shot down in combat was struck by an Iraqi surface-to-air missile over Baghdad on April 8, 2003. The pilot safely ejected and was rescued, according to the Air Force.

In high-threat environments like missions over Iran, Cantwell, the retired general, said an aviator's blood pressure goes up and they become highly alert to incoming missiles. Those are typically either infrared- or radar-guided missiles, he said, requiring different evasive tactics.

If they are hit and need to eject from their aircraft, they are trained on what to do next, he said.

Pilots learn to check for wounds after a violent ejection and the shock of a missile explosion and, most crucially, how they are going to communicate their location so rescuers can find them.

At the same time, he said, the enemy is likely working to intercept the communications or even spoof the location.

Helicopters are more at risk than other aircraft

The planes that went down Friday were not the first crewed American aircraft to be lost overall in Iran.

A military helicopter and airplane exploded in 1980 during an aborted mission to rescue several dozen American hostages at the US embassy in Tehran, according to the Air Force Historical Support Division.

After a series of setbacks, including severe dust storms and mechanical failures, the mission was called off. As the aircraft took off, the rotor blades of one of the RH-53 helicopters collided with an EC-130 aircraft full of fuel and both exploded, killing eight.

More US helicopters have been shot down in recent decades, including a MH-47 Army Chinook helicopter that was struck by a rocket-propelled grenade in Afghanistan in 2005, killing 16. Helicopters are more dangerous because “the lower and the slower, the more susceptible you are,” Cantwell said.

That’s why those who went out on this week's rescue missions, likely in helicopters, he said, did “such a brave and honorable act.”


Iran Leaders Join Crowds on Tehran’s Streets to Project Control in Wartime

An Iranian flag is seen on a residential building that was damaged by recent strikes at Vahdat town in Karaj, southwest of Tehran on April 3, 2026. (AFP)
An Iranian flag is seen on a residential building that was damaged by recent strikes at Vahdat town in Karaj, southwest of Tehran on April 3, 2026. (AFP)
TT

Iran Leaders Join Crowds on Tehran’s Streets to Project Control in Wartime

An Iranian flag is seen on a residential building that was damaged by recent strikes at Vahdat town in Karaj, southwest of Tehran on April 3, 2026. (AFP)
An Iranian flag is seen on a residential building that was damaged by recent strikes at Vahdat town in Karaj, southwest of Tehran on April 3, 2026. (AFP)

After more than a month of being stalked by targeted assassinations, Iran's leadership has adopted a new tactic to show it is still in control - with senior officials walking openly in the streets among small crowds who have gathered in support of the regime.

In recent days, Iran's president and foreign minister have separately mixed with groups of several hundred people in central Tehran. On Tuesday, state television aired footage of the two posing for selfies, talking to members of the public and shaking hands with supporters who had gathered in public areas.

According to insiders and analysts, the appearances are part of a calculated effort by Iran's theocratic leadership to project resilience and authority — not only over the vital Strait of Hormuz but also over the population — despite a sustained US-Israeli campaign aimed at "obliterating" it.

One insider close to the hardline establishment said such public outings are intended to show that the regime is "unshaken by strikes and that it remains in control and vigilant" as the war grinds on.

The US-Israeli war ‌on Iran began on ‌February 28 with the killing of veteran Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and several senior military ‌commanders ⁠in waves of ⁠strikes that have since continued to target top officials.

Iran's new Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, has not been seen in public since taking over on March 8 from his father. Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi, meanwhile, was removed from Israel's hit list amid mediation efforts last month, including by Pakistan, to bring Tehran and Washington together for talks to end the war.

Talks aimed at ending the war have since appeared to have petered out, as Tehran brands US peace proposals "unrealistic". Against that backdrop, recent public appearances by President Masoud Pezeshkian and Araqchi appear designed to project defiance, if not a convincing display of public support.

A senior Iranian source said officials' public presence demonstrates that "the establishment is not intimidated by Israel's targeted killing of top Iranian ⁠figures".

Asked whether Iran's foreign minister or president were on any sort of kill list, an Israeli ‌military spokesperson, Nadav Shoshani, said on Friday he would not "speak about specific personnel."

NIGHTLY RALLIES TO ‌SHOW RESILIENCE

Despite widespread destruction, Tehran appears emboldened by surviving weeks of intense US-Israeli attacks, firing on Gulf countries hosting US troops and demonstrating its ability ‌to effectively block the Strait of Hormuz.

On Wednesday, US President Donald Trump vowed more aggressive strikes on Iran, without offering a timeline ‌for ending hostilities. Tehran responded by warning the United States and Israel that "more crushing, broader and more destructive" attacks were in store.

Encouraged by clerical rulers, supporters of the regime take to the streets each night, filling public squares to show loyalty even as bombs rain down across the country.

Analysts say the establishment is also seeking to raise the "political and reputational" cost of the strikes at a time when civilian casualties are deeply disturbing for Iranians.

Omid Memarian, ‌a senior Iran analyst at DAWN, a Washington-based think tank, said the decision to send officials into gatherings reflects a layered strategy, including an effort to sustain the morale of core supporters ⁠at a moment of acute pressure.

"The system ⁠relies heavily on this base; if its supporters withdraw from public space, its ability to project control and authority weakens significantly," Memarian said.

Speaking to state television, some in the crowds voice unwavering loyalty to Iran's leadership; others oppose the bombing of their country regardless of politics; and some have a stake in the system, including government employees, students and others whose livelihoods are tied to it.

Hadi Ghaemi, head of the New York-based Center for Human Rights in Iran, said the establishment is using such loyal crowds as human shields to raise the cost of any assassination attempts.

"By being in the middle of large crowds they have protections that would make Israeli-American attacks against them very bloody and generate sympathy worldwide," he said.

POTENTIAL PROTESTERS STAY OFF STREETS AT NIGHT

The Islamic republic emerged from a 1979 revolution backed by millions of Iranians. But decades of rule marked by corruption, repression and mismanagement have thinned that support, alienating many ordinary people.

While there has been little sign so far of anti-government protests that erupted in January and abated after a deadly crackdown, the establishment has adopted harsh measures, such as arrests, executions and large-scale deployment of security forces, to prevent any sparks of dissent.

Rights groups have warned about "rushed executions" during wartime after Iran hanged at least seven political prisoners during the war.

"Many potential protesters are frightened by the continuing presence of armed men and violent crowds in the streets and largely stay at home once darkness falls," Ghaemi said.