Over the past years, Syrians and observers in the Arab and Western world have become accustomed to the foreign visits of the President of the Syrian regime, Bashar al-Assad, to be “surprising” and without warning, whether those he makes to Russia, his most prominent ally, or like those that happened Sunday to Tehran, and he accepted it for the first time to the UAE United Arab Emirates.
In all of these visits, Assad did not hold any “protocol ceremonies” or remarkable ceremonies, but rather hastily publishes flash pictures of him with his Russian, Iranian or other counterparts, without passing, as usual, on a red carpet, or being greeted by the honor guard, simultaneously. With the playing of the national anthem.
This situation raises, from time to time, many questions regarding the reasons behind the failure of these countries visited by al-Assad to hold internationally recognized ceremonies, while some observers’ analyzes go to “political and security” considerations.
Al-Assad arrived in the Iranian capital, Tehran, on Sunday, on a “rare” visit, his second since 2011, when he met the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic, Ali Khamenei, and Iranian President Ibrahim Raisi.
The two sides discussed economic and political issues, according to Iranian and Syrian media, while the main reasons for such a move were not clear, especially as it comes on the impact of rapid regional and international developments, and at a time when Russia, its main ally, is under pressure due to its war once morest Ukraine.
The Supreme Leader said, according to a statement posted on his website, that relations between Tehran and Damascus are “vital” and that “more joint efforts should be made to develop relations between the two countries more and more.”
For his part, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh indicated on Monday that “Syria has emerged from the atmosphere created for it by terrorists and conspirators,” considering Assad’s visit to Tehran “that it carried with it a very important message, which is that Syria has entered a new phase.”
A personal decision or a summons?
Two years ago, following the decline in the scope of military operations in Syria, the Syrian regime had tended to promote the “victorious Assad idea”, despite the state of Arab “isolation” he is experiencing, as well as the West, in addition to the extensive record of violations committed by its forces once morest civilians, according to documentation The United Nations and international human rights organizations.
And soon, talk regarding this idea from his side increased little by little, with Arab countries taking paths to normalize their relations with him, but this was not enough so far to break the state of isolation imposed on him.
This isolation, according to observers, has an impact on Assad’s visits abroad, which over the past years have been restricted to Moscow, Tehran and Abu Dhabi only. It was in the same general context, from the point of view of its nature and the timing factor in which it came.
Although the “allied countries” opened the doors to receive him at different times, they did not adopt any “honorary protocol”, at a time when questions arose: “Did he come out by a personal decision or was he summoned?”
The former Syrian diplomat, Bashar Al-Hajj Ali, believes that a distinction must be made between two aspects of the protocols, the first, such as “distancing and wearing a muzzle, as happened recently in the Corona pandemic,” and the second related to “derogation of sovereignty.”
Al-Hajj Ali said in an interview with Al-Hurra: “The second part applies to the case of the head of the Syrian regime, Bashar al-Assad. It is related to the undermining of his sovereignty and his position, and that he is the head of a state.”
The former Syrian diplomat believes that the above is closer “to messages used by the interfering forces in Syria, such as Iran and Russia, to say that they are the decision-makers and that whoever comes is a subordinate and not a president.”
Al-Hajj Ali reviewed some details of the protocols and honor ceremonies, noting: “In countries, the president is received in the palace with two flags, the national anthem is played, and the guard of honor is received.”
But with regard to Assad’s visits, the same spokesman continues: “Like his arrival in Tehran, for example. It is an external, political and internal message, to fuel propaganda and victories that Iran controls Syria. It was a summons visit, nothing more.”
For his part, the political analyst residing in Damascus, Alaa Al-Asfari, considered that “the visits that Assad makes, to a large extent, take place away from superficial and unimportant protocols.”
Asfari told Al-Hurra: “Assad wants an achievement in his visits. He believes in working for the benefit of his country, his people, and his homeland, away from the hollow protocols that we hear between countries.”
He added, “We are at war with hostile countries, with Israel, America and some Gulf countries.”
Asfari points to another factor in the absence of protocols, or even prior announcements of visits, saying: “This comes to prevent any personal targeting of Assad. Therefore, it is surprising.”
He also adds: “Announcing the visit in advance may lead to embarrassment or pressure – on the UAE, for example,” stressing: “Avoiding superficial protocols may benefit in urgent and urgent Syrian issues. It is Assad who is staying away from the hustle and bustle of hollow protocols,” as he put it.
As for the Syrian researcher at the “Omran Center for Strategic Studies”, Nawar Shaaban, he considered that the method of Assad’s visit is summarized within the framework of “messages from one country to other countries.”
Shaaban said in an interview with Al-Hurra: “When Iran sends a commercial plane to Bashar al-Assad and receives him in this way, it means that it has sent a message that says: We are in control of him, despite the entry of other Arab countries on the line.”
“In the media context, following the visits, understandings and promotion of common interests are announced,” he added.
But the researcher sees the matter otherwise, and continues: “The discussions serve as messages and directions for the coming period. These directives are security and include giving al-Assad mechanisms to act in the event that certain scenarios occur, such as the entry of countries into the Syrian file, or even the destabilization of the Russian proliferation, a reflection of what is happening in Ukraine.”
Are there security reasons?
In the meantime, it has been the international diplomatic custom that a full program of work must be prepared in advance that organizes the visits of presidents to another country.
This program sets the timing of the visit, its stations and the members of the delegation that will be accompanied by the head of state.
In the past ten years, the Presidency of the Syrian Republic has rarely announced such steps, so that it does not generally specify the exact date on which al-Assad’s visit to a country took place, from where he came and landed, and how?
According to Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh, Assad’s visit to Tehran on Sunday “was programmed”, and that “following the conditions were created, he came to Tehran, accompanied by a high-level delegation.”
In turn, the former Iranian diplomat, Hadi Afqi, told Mehr Agency that the meeting that took place is “a thorn in the eyes of those who bet on creating a rift in the strategic relationship between Iran and Syria, by opening their embassies and participating in the reconstruction, as they claim.”
He added: “This blessed meeting has its blessings, victories and achievements that permeate the entire geography of the resistance axis, but rather the whole of West Asia.”
The former Syrian diplomat, Bashar Al-Haj Ali, explains that “the security measures are not with heads of state,” ruling out that there are security reasons, due to the absence of protocols or even a prior announcement of the visit.
And the Syrian diplomat adds: “The security measures are linked to a personal and security visit. Mostly they are secret, covered, and tarnished.”
Al-Hajj Ali continues: “The president’s visit is to be informational and to send political messages. Dropping the protocols cannot be an inadvertence!”
For his part, while the former Syrian diplomat, Danny Al-Baaj, says that the failure to announce Assad’s visits in advance is “undoubtedly security”, adding that “there is a clear protocol defect, especially since what is preventing him from receiving him at the airport or in honorary ceremonies?”
Al-Baaj explained in an interview with Al-Hurra: “As a security consideration, the date of exit from Syria is not announced. But when he arrives in Russia or Iran, what are the reasons that prevent that?”
“There is an incomprehensible defect in this aspect,” and the former Syrian diplomat asserts the idea that “there is a security motive for not announcing the visits in advance, but there is also a clear protocol defect following their disclosure in the media.”
