How shocking it was this week to see statements by leading Iranian officials offering advice and criticism on Syria’s handling of its protests. One must grimace at the utter hypocrisy of Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi talking about the Syrian people’s “legitimate demands”, and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad saying “a military solution is never a solution” to protests and voicing support for the implementation of reforms.
If only Iran had heeded its own advise with its protests over the disputed elections of 2009. Did not the people of Iran have “legitimate demands” during their protests? And did not the Iranian government use a “military solution” to end its own protests? Where was Ahmadinejad with his support for democratic reforms then? Oh yeah, he was benefiting from the very lack of such reforms in his highly suspicious and non-transparent reelection.
Meanwhile, Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mehdi Karroubi remain under house arrest in isolation since they called for demonstrations in solidarity with Arab protestors in February. Is this Ahmadinejad’s idea of “talks” with the opposition?
Yet this is just the beginning of the hypocrisy. Not only does Iran’s recent advice and criticism on Syria not match how they have handled their own protests, but it is not even consistent with how Iran has acted with Syria’s current protests. For it has been widely reported that Iran has been assisting Syria with their violent crackdown by sending them trainers, technology, and even snipers.
In fact what is now being called the “legitimate demands” of the Syrian people were up until last week being referred to as a foreign conspiracy that the Supreme Leader Khamenei said “the hand of America and Israel is evident.” The Iranian ambassador to Syria even referred to the protestors as “foreign mercenaries.” What a difference a week makes.
This newfound compassion from Iran towards the treatment of civilians is even more unbelievable given that Iran has still refused to let the United Nations human rights monitor into the country.
Additionally, Iran faces a credibility problem in the area that it has gone to great lengths to cultivate a positive image of its self—the ‘Arab street’. A recent poll by the Arab American Institute found that the image among Arab populations of Iran has fallen rapidly since 2006-2008. AAI’s Jim Zogby says that Iran owed its popularity to its “active defiance to the West,” but this has diminished amidst the “Arab spring,” the Iranian response to its own protest movement, and a reduction in “bellicose” rhetoric coming from a U.S. that is increasingly considered less relevant among Arab populations.
The extreme importance of Syria as an avenue for Iran to maintain influence in the Levant makes Iran’s recent statements appear less like change of heart regarding Syria’s uprising and more like a calculated hedging of their bets on the outcome of the protests. If the uprising does succeed in the overthrow of Assad then Iran will need to be able to salvage some remnant of their former relationship. So Iran’s crocodile tears over Syria’s harsh treatment of the protestors are likely a very transparent attempt to create a visible history of support for the protestors.
With Syria being so strategically important and as Iran places such a high value on its imagine in the Arab street, it is not a cynical suggestion to say that these recent statements by Iranian officials have nothing to do with human rights and everything to do with Iranian officials protecting their own power by hedging their bets.
September 9, 2011