Iranian President Hassan Rouhani last month made a state visit to France during the same time as the Syria talks in Geneva were to resume.
From a historical point of view, the difference between another political quagmire (would certain members of the Syrian opposition meet with President Bashar Al Assad’s representatives?), and a geostrategic issue, which is the return of Iran to the world stage, was striking. The latter was made possible thanks to the nuclear agreement signed on July 14, 2015, between Iran and the ‘Group of 5+1’, and Iran has not lost any time since.
A few questions remain over the return of Iran — will it honour and respect the signed agreement? What effect will Iran’s internal struggle between the religious establishment and the moderates have on the country’s foreign policy? And finally, what will happen to the nuclear agreement if the next US President decides to work against one of the few foreign policy successes of the Obama administration? Keeping this in mind, it is clear Iran wishes to make up for lost time.
This was evident last week with Rouhani’s successful trip to Italy — previously a main trade partner of Iran — where a significant number of contracts were signed. The Iranian president then arrived in Paris on January 28 and was received by French President Francois Hollande with all the honours befitting a distinguished guest.
Does this mean a U-turn for French diplomacy? France was particularly rigid towards Iran during the course of nuclear-deal negotiations. But diplomacy was then led by Foreign Affairs Minister, Laurent Fabius, who is due to leave his position soon, to be appointed Chairman of the French Constitutional Council, and it is likely that part of his ‘neo-con’ advisers will follow suit. As for Hollande, a kind of U-turn had already started on Syria when he finally admitted some weeks ago that, unless one wanted to repeat the Iraq tragedy after the US invasion, Syrian President Bashar Al Assad should stay for an ‘intermediary period’, until a new political agreement emerges.
While some immature diplomacy continues, considering that the main regional threat is Iran, and the sectarian divide is ‘the’ issue, Iran quietly pushes through, and that first European trip was for Rouhani a case of excellence.
The visit to France was two-sided: a commercial one that began with many contracts being signed with the Paris Airport Authority, Total, Peugeot, Airbus and ATR. But another reason for the visit was to explore the political role Iran could play in the region, and that is when Daesh (the self-proclaimed Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant), and of course, the Syrian issues come to the forefront: who could deny indeed the positive influence a well-behaved Iran could have on such matters?
Let us remember the situation in Syria, where 260,000 people have been killed, millions have been displaced and a whole generation has been lost, with nobody interfering to stop the massacre, but continuing to sponsor their respective local pawns. Actually, the Syrian civil war has become an international conflict in which foreign actors have given arms and financial aid to the many participants — including Daesh, which shows well how the matter has become global.
On the ground, there is a certain level of stalemate. Daesh recently lost some ground in Iraq but it remains to be seen whether that will be the case in Syria. Air strikes are not enough to defeat the group, everybody now agrees, and one needs troops on the field — which so far have been limited to Al Assad’s troops (with the much-needed recent additional help from Russia) and the Kurds.
But to address the Daesh issue and resolve the Syrian drama, the Europeans “need the help of all the countries in the region”, Hollande said on January 21 — although he didn’t say what kind of help that would be. Europe also admits that soldiers are needed on the ground, but stopped short of saying who. UK Foreign Minister Michael Falton added after Hollande: “We are ready to help any moderate opposition groups in Syria, as long as we can identify them.”
Hence, a political settlement is increasingly appearing to be the only exit strategy, in which all regional sponsors should work towards — including, obviously, Iran, as well as all those Syrian political forces — excluding the terrorist factions, with the only wish that the talks are as inclusive as possible.
UN special envoy to Syria Staffan De Mistura did not say anything else when he recalled the terms of UN Resolution 2254, calling for the “wider possible spectrum” of representatives at the Geneva talks — except those labelled terrorists.
The positive role Iran can play in the Syria quagmire is becoming increasingly evident. Together with the US, Russia and China, it would be a good start if France, in close cooperation with its Arab allies, could take advantage of the Rouhani visit to relaunch cooperation between actors who have much more in common than what is being recognised by the supporters of the sectarian divide.
Luc Debieuvre is a French essayist and a lecturer at Iris (Institut de Relations Internationales et Strategiques) and the Faco Law University of Paris.
